Debunk evolution once and for all

reply to post by The Matrix Traveller


Nicely put

Star for you

Now let's all have a laugh, let's all visit the thread where Iran called Sarkozy's wife a prostitute lol..

Originally posted by hippomchippo
[edit on 30-8-2010 by tigpoppa]

I'm guessing you didn't even read the links you sent to me.


Meh, I skimmed them but didnt read them totally since wiki isnt where I get my facts. Wouldnt be a good scientist if I built my work off wiki. But no it isnt just used by religious nuts, its the very premise of studying population genetics and variances over time. Hey if you want to cling to that part then go for it. These are still terms used to differentiate between the two.

Also for all other readers of the thread, people citing fossils and all the other BS, its built off opinion and not fact. If it was fact it wouldnt be a theory. People who believe evolution is fact might as well believe in santa clause or that were all in some hackysack being bantyed about as a toy for gods kids. Seriously sometimes I think its kooky how people try to add things to science that dont exist like that it is a fact or this and that PROVES THEM RIGHT! as if there is some eureka moment and all of evolution is real or something.

At the end of the day ti doesnt matter if evolution is real or not or religion real or not. There will always be religion. Somehow humans have a propensity for some personality traits, such as being part of groups and seeking out life partners and this strange other purpose of having a religion which is completely irrational yet many find solace in religion. Something in our genes I believe gives rise to this biometaphysical phenomenon I believe much like people seeking life partners or belonging to groups. Its only a few people who dont have the tendency and live alone like hobbits those people should be vivisected and studied to detail what makes them different. Differences are how we can find the strings that tie us all together and unify us as what we call humanity.

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller

I did not suggest a god..... That is your belief..

Look if we humans produce an up-grade say in software, does this mean the Computer is evolving by itself ???

Or is the change due to the new software, which was Not developed by the Computer ???

Some may say it could be Computer designed, but really the Computer only assists the designer...
In this case The MIND

If you are suggesting that the Biological Robotics is "LIFE", acording to say Christianity, then you are incorrect...

I like the way our hamster wheel turns, Im just going to throw a bone out there for fun since this is a lively discussion and say are not mutations influenced by outside forces? Much like a computer upgrade is influenced because something is out of date like video cards or a security loophole?

I wouldnt uses religion to argue anything on a forum. The only reason I say that is because if their not from your religion they wont get what your trying to say. I get it because I am catholic but dont assume everyone else does.


All of this reminds me of a great movie I saw called what the Fu&% do we know.
here is a clip, for all those interested in this type of discussion though not 100% evolution. What I like about it is that this is a provocative commentary using science so I hope someone watches it and enjoys it, here is a clip.



[edit on 30-8-2010 by tigpoppa]

reply to post by oozyism


Thank you for your comments...

People have to learn to think "outside the square"...

That is to use the MIND... or become "AWARE"...

I understand your frustration...

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller
reply to post by hippomchippo

 

I did not suggest a god..... That is your belief..

Look if we humans produce an up-grade say in software, does this mean the Computer is evolving by itself ???

Or is the change due to the new software, which was Not developed by the Computer ???

Some may say it could be Computer designed, but really the Computer only assists the designer...
In this case The MIND

If you are suggesting that the Biological Robotics is "LIFE", acording to say Christianity, then you are incorrect...

From "The Gospel of Thomas"... Quote;

56. Jesus said,

“Whoever has come to understand the World
has found only a corpse,

and whoever has found a corpse
is superior to the World.”

[edit on 30-8-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]

So what do you mean then when you say WHAT
I assumed you meant some sort of all encompassing God.

reply to post by tigpoppa


Look I am NOT a religious person and Not a Catholic or of any other religion...

To tell the truth "Catholics" would Crucify me if they could....

Edit Sorry spelling in they....

[edit on 30-8-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller
reply to post by hippomchippo

 

I did not suggest a god..... That is your belief..

Look if we humans produce an up-grade say in software, does this mean the Computer is evolving by itself ???

Or is the change due to the new software, which was Not developed by the Computer ???

Some may say it could be Computer designed, but really the Computer only assists the designer...
In this case The MIND

If you are suggesting that the Biological Robotics is "LIFE", acording to say Christianity, then you are incorrect...

From "The Gospel of Thomas"... Quote;

56. Jesus said,

“Whoever has come to understand the World
has found only a corpse,

and whoever has found a corpse
is superior to the World.”

[edit on 30-8-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]

So what do you mean then when you say WHAT
I assumed you meant some sort of all encompassing God.

NO.....

Originally posted by tigpoppa
Meh, I skimmed them but didnt read them totally since wiki isnt where I get my facts. Wouldnt be a good scientist if I built my work off wiki. But no it isnt just used by religious nuts, its the very premise of studying population genetics and variances over time. Hey if you want to cling to that part then go for it. These are still terms used to differentiate between the two.

Also for all other readers of the thread, people citing fossils and all the other BS, its built off opinion and not fact. If it was fact it wouldnt be a theory. People who believe evolution is fact might as well believe in santa clause or that were all in some hackysack being bantyed about as a toy for gods kids. Seriously sometimes I think its kooky how people try to add things to science that dont exist like that it is a fact or this and that PROVES THEM RIGHT! as if there is some eureka moment and all of evolution is real or something.

At the end of the day ti doesnt matter if evolution is real or not or religion real or not. There will always be religion. Somehow humans have a propensity for some personality traits, such as being part of groups and seeking out life partners and this strange other purpose of having a religion which is completely irrational yet many find solace in religion. Something in our genes I believe gives rise to this biometaphysical phenomenon I believe much like people seeking life partners or belonging to groups. Its only a few people who dont have the tendency and live alone like hobbits those people should be vivisected and studied to detail what makes them different. Differences are how we can find the strings that tie us all together and unify us as what we call humanity.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by tigpoppa]

You need to learn what a scientific theory is.
A scientific theory is built to explain an observable fact.

It's like saying that gravity is only a theory.
No, gravity is a fact that was explained by newtons theory of gravity, which was then revised by Einstein.

Wiki isn't where you get your facts yet you try to use it to push that evolution isn't happening? Also, most information is cited with proper sources

How do you explain the transitional fossils? or the strata of the earth where simple lifeforms EVOLVED before complex ones?

You can believe in a God, and it's a pretty good idea, and it may very well be true, but that doesn't disprove evolution, just as evolution doesn't disprove god.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by hippomchippo]

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller
NO.....

Amazing post.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN THEN?
What is this "WHAT" you keep referring to in your posts?

[edit on 30-8-2010 by hippomchippo]

reply to post by hippomchippo


Yes to explain an observable fact, what do you think the observable fact is lol?

A Theory is simply the explanation, then more scientific discoveries either go against those explanations or supports it.

It is a long process.

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by hippomchippo

 

Yes to explain an observable fact, what do you think the observable fact is lol?

A Theory is simply the explanation, then more scientific discoveries either go against those explanations or supports it.

It is a long process.

The observable fact is change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next.
Yes, it is a long process, and the THEORY of evolution will probably be revised several times before we can come to a decent understanding of HOW things evolve, what won't happen, is that something will come along and "debunk" something that is a known fact.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by hippomchippo]

reply to post by hippomchippo


Well, technically........gravity is a fine example to use, to help expalin WHY evolution is still in "theory" status:

It's like saying that gravity is only a theory.
No, gravity is a fact...

...because, well.....GRAVITY is undeniable, just like evolution. It is observed, and observable.

However, ALL of the intricate mechanisms that account for gravity are yet to be discovered, so that it can be FULLY defined, in a proper scientific manner. We are [X]% there. It is measured, and defined in THAT way, but its underlying mechanisms, and "REASON for being", still to be thoroughly defined.

Evolution is similar, in the sense that it is a "theory" (like gravity) because it is SO complex, and cannot be elevated to a fundamental status above theory, in a purely scientific defintion of the words and terms.

Putting it another way: "Theories" are working models of how something behaves, interacts, etc. Therefore, the base premises are not in question -- it is the SPECIFIC mechanisms that are yet to be ferreted out, and defined.

This (for the "evolution deniers") is probably better explained by merely looking up definitions of "theory" and "laws" in the scientific terminology sense. Learning is good....denying ignorance is good....NOT learning? BAD.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by hippomchippo

 

Well, technically........gravity is a fine example to use, to help expalin WHY evolution is still in "theory" status:

It's like saying that gravity is only a theory.
No, gravity is a fact...

...because, well.....GRAVITY is undeniable, just like evolution. It is observed, and observable.

However, ALL of the intricate mechanisms that account for gravity are yet to be discovered, so that it can be FULLY defined, in a proper scientific manner. We are [X]% there. It is measured, and defined in THAT way, but its underlying mechanisms, and "REASON for being", still to be thoroughly defined.

Evolution is similar, in the sense that it is a "theory" (like gravity) because it is SO complex, and cannot be elevated to a fundamental status above theory, in a purely scientific defintion of the words and terms.

Putting it another way: "Theories" are working models of how something behaves, interacts, etc. Therefore, the base premises are not in question -- it is the SPECIFIC mechanisms that are yet to be ferreted out, and defined.

This (for the "evolution deniers") is probably better explained by merely looking up definitions of "theory" and "laws" in the scientific terminology sense. Learning is good....denying ignorance is good....NOT learning? BAD.

Exactly, couldn't have put the whole theory-fact thing in better words.

reply to post by hippomchippo


Not long ago it was a fact that the sun doesn't rotate

You get what I mean right??

Arrogant people will always fall in the same trap, I don't know who built that trap but it is a damn fine one, perfectly made for us..

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by hippomchippo

 

Not long ago it was a fact that the sun doesn't rotate

You get what I mean right??

Arrogant people will always fall in the same trap, I don't know who built that trap but it is a damn fine one, perfectly made for us..

No, it wasn't a fact that the sun doesn't rotate.
And even if it was, it was proven wrong.
YOU haven't proven the fact of evolution wrong, at all.

reply to post by hippomchippo


This thread has a long way to go, we will all learn something from it, except the arrogant

I have learned much, you can continue claiming I haven't debunked evolution, it shows your true colors, I hope you know what I'm talking about when I say your true colors

So when was the last time you tested speciation??

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by hippomchippo

 

This thread has a long way to go, we will all learn something from it, except the arrogant

I have learned much, you can continue claiming I haven't debunked evolution, it shows your true colors, I hope you know what I'm talking about when I say your true colors

So when was the last time you tested speciation??

You say you've learned much when really all you seem to be doing is denying obvious facts with no evidence.

I'm not an evolutionary biologist, so I don't personally test speciation.
Good lord are you still parading the same ignorance about speciation?

It takes millions of years for complex life to go from one species to another, while for simple life, it happens fast enough that we can actually catch it.

Why do I have the feeling you'll start crying about micro-macro again? What is it with this circular logic?

You've had mountains of evidence thrown at you and yet you seem to be dodging it with ease while providing no evidence of your own that evolution is false.

Evolution is a fact, whether you like it or not.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by hippomchippo]

reply to post by hippomchippo


"WHAT".... refers perhaps, to what you would call MIND....
But this depends on the Interpretation of "MIND"...

Mind is Not a god.... but is a "technical" entity...

I understand from my own involvement with R&D regarding "Interfaces with the Mind" that your Mind (of what you call the mind i.e. each mind) is a "Partition" of a Single MIND, which has produced All.

So perhaps when we awaken to our real self (Mind), we will realise that is the real us (Mind) which are a "Component" of what has produced the experience you refer to as the universe and species within it...

NOT a god.... OK ???

We Collectively Created All.... to experience, and yes this "Animation Program" (the human "Species" and its "environment", this little universe) has a unique purpose... and is unlike any other Universe....

But then again I may be completelly wrong ???

[edit on 30-8-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller
reply to post by hippomchippo

 

"WHAT".... refers perhaps, to what you would call MIND....
But this depends on the Interpretation of "MIND"...

Mind is Not a god.... but is a "technical" entity...

I understand from my own involvement with R&D regarding "Interfaces with the Mind" that your Mind (of what you call the mind i.e. each mind) is a "Partition" of a Single MIND, which has produced All.

So perhaps when we awaken to your real self (Mind), we will realise that is the real us (Mind) which are a "Component" of what has produced the experience you refer to as the universe and species within it...

NOT a god.... OK ???

We Collectively Created All.... to experience, and yes this "Animation Program" (the human "Species" and its "environment", this little universe) as a unique purpose... and is unlike any other Universe....

But then again I may be completelly wrong ???

Uh, ok.
Got any evidence?
And how would this disprove evolution?
The mind doesn't produce reality, the mind interprets reality..
Something tells me you've been watching what the bleep do we know.

reply to post by hippomchippo


You're repeating the same theory, which is a theory backed by circumstantial evidence, not hardcore evidence which is exactly why they call it a theory.

You don't get what scientific theory comprises of?



I have learned much, I'm trying to see if you are willing to learn or are you a Darwin worshipper.

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by hippomchippo

 

You're repeating the same theory, which is a theory backed by circumstantial evidence, not hardcore evidence which is exactly why they call it a theory.

You don't get what scientific theory comprises of?



I have learned much, I'm trying to see if you are willing to learn or are you a Darwin worshipper.

Oh for god sakes.

EVOLUTION IS A FACT.
THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION IS A THEORY.
TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SUBJECTS.

Darwin is PROBABLY wrong about his theory, but until we have something better, we'll use it, you can go ahead and find holes in darwins theory, but you're going to be hard pressed to try to find holes in evolution itself.