Is evolution just a "theory"?

reply to post by LABTECH767


Im aware that it's a theory, but religious people make it seem like it's just an idea.

Say there is a rock...a stone. Leave it in standing in some puddle outside and shortly thereafter...it will have tiny microscopic mold spores growing on it.

From non living....to life created-grown-developed where once there was just a stone. Something living on something not-living.

It evolved. Both the stone....and the mold...into something other than its original form(s). They have "evolved".

Originally posted by mysterioustranger
Say there is a rock...a stone. Leave it in standing in some puddle outside and shortly thereafter...it will have tiny microscopic mold spores growing on it.

From non living....to life created-grown-developed where once there was just a stone. Something living on something not-living.

It evolved. Both the stone....and the mold...into something other than its original form(s). They have "evolved".

edit on 05/05/13 by mysterioustranger because: spelling

Sorry, I don't know what point you are trying to make.

Additionally...havent we all evolved from those 1st school years when we were 5-6 years old? We went from there to grade, middle, high school and perhaps college. We evolved.

Same with creation. Neatly...both creation and evolution are real...and can be proven...just enough to confuse the issue for the next few thousand years of so.

Maybe BOTH are true? One day, we will all know for sure....once we've EVOLVED!

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by LABTECH767

 

Im aware that it's a theory, but religious people make it seem like it's just an idea.

That is because many people see it as a challenge to there religious belief or there understanding of the claims made by there religion as to how everything came to be, but as yet very few religions have an answer as to how there god'(s) came to be and therefore there beginning is not the beginning as there is a creator in there hypothesis but few religions try to explain how there was a creator and were that creator came from or how it came into being itself.
For some of us whom are or were religious we do not see a clash between believing in a religion and our science but are still bound in the endless argument amongst ourselves as to which of us are right? and that is were the real paradox of religious logic is.

Originally posted by LABTECH767

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by LABTECH767

 

Im aware that it's a theory, but religious people make it seem like it's just an idea.

That is because many people see it as a challenge to there religious belief or there understanding of the claims made by there religion as to how everything came to be, but as yet very few religions have an answer as to how there god'(s) came to be and therefore there beginning is not the beginning as there is a creator in there hypothesis but few religions try to explain how there was a creator and were that creator came from or how it came into being itself.
For some of us whom are or were religious we do not see a clash between believing in a religion and our science but are still bound in the endless argument amongst ourselves as to which of us are right? and that is were the real paradox of religious logic is.

But isn't it funny that they don't accept evolution when they haven't even studied about it.

They ask for proof about Science but I wonder if they ask themselves the same question about their God.

It's because they don't understand extremely basic scientific terms and concepts.

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by introV

 

There are many different kinds of evolution sir.

Cosmic Evolution
Divergent Evolution
Convergent Evolution
Parallel Evolution

Are you serious? What does cosmic evolution have to do with this?

and the other are evolutionary trends, not theories.

If you want to sum them all up with the webster dictionary definition, then so be it. Sorry I brought up your dreaded Abiogenesis (sorry it can't be proven).

We are not summing anything up. and Abiogenesis is not dreaded either. It can't be proven, but if you are religious and believe in a God, I wonder if you ask yourself the same thing.

The fact that evolution cannot precisely be proven, by experiment OR observation, alludes to the fact of why there are so many theories and questions in the complexity of how we came to be. The big bang, followed by our solar system forming, getting to the point some amino acids turned into DNA, which SOMEHOW evolved (using your plain, unprecise definition) into us humans here today.

Evolution is a fact. The Theory of Evolution is the best explanation there is because it couldn't be disproven for more than 100 years.

The "best explanation" is not a fact, it's guesses based on both circumstantial and "possibly" some empirical data and therefore, the "theory of evolution" is a theory. As an example, I can't disprove that someone is involved in say a coup, but the point that I can't disprove something doesn't make the inverse a fact. It's like you can't prove a negative.

So survey says! Theory!

Cheers - Dave

reply to post by bobs_uruncle


I meant that Evolution is a fact, not the Theory of Evolution.

hohum
time to inject a little "Insanity" into the debate
and deny ignorance










the entire Evidence FOR Evolution and Against Creationism series playlist 35
www.youtube.com...
the naysayers arguments summed up w/ a pic and a video


Evolution is merely an old greek word for CHANGE
and that's what the anti-evolution crowd truly fears and seeks to deny

reply to post by TheMagus

Evolution is merely an old greek for CHANGE
and that's what the anti-evolution crowd truly fears and seeks to deny

Evolution really is a fact, while the Theory of Evolution is what describes how it could happen. If something can be disproven, then it would be the Theory of Evolution, not Evolution itself. But it highly unlikely, the Theory has not been disproven for 150 years.

The people who deny it don't even know the difference between Abiogenesis and Evolution.

It's funny that they think that without Abiogenesis, there is no Evolution.

They think that they can deny everything just by saying "there is no proof that amino acids created a cell".

Originally posted by danielsil18
reply to post by TheMagus

 

Evolution is merely an old greek for CHANGE
and that's what the anti-evolution crowd truly fears and seeks to deny

Evolution really is a fact, while the Theory of Evolution is what describes how it could happen. If something can be disproven, then it would be the Theory of Evolution, not Evolution itself. But it highly unlikely, the Theory has not been disproven for 150 years.

The people who deny it don't even know the difference between Abiogenesis and Evolution.

It's funny that they think that without Abiogenesis, there is no Evolution.

They think that they can deny everything just by saying "there is no proof that amino acids created a cell".

So which one does the creation of man follow under? Evolution or The Theory of Evolution?

reply to post by danielsil18


Creation & Evolution are both just theories. There is no definitive proof of either one being true.
People who believe in either theory just have to go on faith that their theory is correct.

There may be some evidence that backs up either idea but no actual proof.

Same thing goes for UFO's and every other conspiracy.

Originally posted by mwood
reply to post by danielsil18

 

Creation & Evolution are both just theories. There is no definitive proof of either one being true.
People who believe in either theory just have to go on faith that their theory is correct.

There may be some evidence that backs up either idea but no actual proof.

Same thing goes for UFO's and every other conspiracy.

Uh oh.... you used the word 'faith' when referencing Evolutionists. Flame on.

reply to post by danielsil18


OK, then prove evolution is real. Collect the empirical data over millions of years showing the genetic changes/anomalies that produce the hybrids which then produce the final species that has "adapted" according to evolutionary theory.

Actually, if adaptation is a requisite to evolution and you are motivated to prove the "theory," you should be able to spontaneously adapt right now so that you can prove said "theory." So, if you're going to do that, I suggest you adapt in such a way that will cap chromosomes and produce non-degrading telomerase strings (you don't want errors in replication) so that you can live for millions of years,

It's gonna take a long time to prove that theory ;-)

Cheers - Dave

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle
OK, then prove evolution is real.
It's gonna take a long time to prove that theory ;-)

Semantic word games again.
Even if evolution was proven to be true by every test possible, it would STILL be called a "theory" because thats the scientific term.

Anyway, even the creationist website answersingenesis have got more brains than some people in this thread:

Arguments that should be avoided ...
Evolution is just a theory. (“Theory” has a stronger meaning in scientific fields than in general usage...

Because Darwin called it a theory.... man, duh!

Besides that... prove it's real. Lets start with all life in all it's variety, including your ability to sit at a PC and discuss things with people from all around the world.... started as microbe in a stagnant pond after volcanoes cooled on a planet that started as bits of dust after an explosion of nothing... at some time in space. !!!

That clear enough?

Theory means something specific to scientists, and another to the common vernacular of unqualified people.

Originally posted by danielsil18
Why do some religious people call it just a "theory"?

They call evolution a hypothesis, an idea, or just a "theory". They make it seem like if it was just some random thought from someone.

So that's what I'm interested about. Why call evolution just a "theory".

Also for those who call it just a "theory", how much do you know about evolution?

edit on 5-7-2013 by danielsil18 because: (no reason given)

There are about six different forms of evolution, so if you could let people which one you are referring to, they may be able to answer your question. Or are you one of those who just rolls it all into one general definition?

How much do YOU know about evolution? Doesn't seem like very much, just based on your question.

People who believe in the THEORY of evolution will be the first to state during a debate that information is changing all the time, and that what may be true today may change tomorrow based on any new evidence which is found. They even claim that scientists are always disagreeing about different pieces of evidence in order to come to a rational conclusion.

So much confusion, and so much uncertainty, and you're wondering why it's referred to as only a theory. It must be because I'm sleepy, but I find that kind of funny.