SRL Archive - Discussions & Debates

Was it?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_noway.htm#nop

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/newton/askasci/1993/biology/bio039.htm

Well I had a debate with my Atheist Science teacher… He told me everything was based off the big bang. Then he told me even evolution. Then I asked him is there any physical proof about evolution. He told me there all "correct" theories and they will be proven in the future. He also told me that scientists dont know how the big bang came to be yet.

There's hardly anything in existence that can be proven.
This color. While most likely everyone on this forum, and millions of other people would agree it is blue, you can't prove that it is blue. You can just make an educated guess that it is the color blue.

To cut to the chase, it is not proven that humans evolved from another life form if that's what you're poking at. There is plenty evidence that evolution itself exists, such as how influenza evolves.

Hehe, family guy perspective: "God was partying and lit a fart"

From: scubajesus
There's hardly anything in existence that can be proven.
This color. While most likely everyone on this forum, and millions of other people would agree it is blue, you can't prove that it is blue. You can just make an educated guess that it is the color blue.

To cut to the chase, it is not proven that humans evolved from another life form if that's what you're poking at. There is plenty evidence that evolution itself exists, such as how influenza evolves.

I suppose so. So its not proven that humans evolved from fish etc etc?

It's about as proven as the Bible.

From: kingarabian
I suppose so. So its not proven that humans evolved from fish etc etc?

It is in fact not proven. If you want to make a good side in an argument you'll want to find reasons why certain theories your opponent might make up are invalid.
Personally I'd drop it with your teacher unless he brings it up, otherwise it just seems like you went home and spent the entire day trying to find reasons he's wrong that you couldn't do on the spot.


I'm really trying to avoid turning this thread into a flame war here. Very touchy subject.

From: scubajesus
It is in fact not proven. If you want to make a good side in an argument you'll want to find reasons why certain theories your opponent might make up are invalid.
Personally I'd drop it with your teacher unless he brings it up, otherwise it just seems like you went home and spent the entire day trying to find reasons he's wrong that you couldn't do on the spot.


I'm really trying to avoid turning this thread into a flame war here. Very touchy subject.

Alright thanks for your insights in a positive manner. No my teacher causes alot of controversy with parents/kids. Hes pretty close to getting fired.

I just wanted to hear from other people to ;).

Sorry for the SPAM, but this gets me EVERY TIME!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8asQkegV_wk

From: kingarabian
Was it?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_noway.htm#nop

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/newton/askasci/1993/biology/bio039.htm

Well I had a debate with my Atheist Science teacher… He told me everything was based off the big bang. Then he told me even evolution. Then I asked him is there any physical proof about evolution. He told me there all "correct" theories and they will be proven in the future. He also told me that scientists dont know how the big bang came to be yet.

From previous threads, you're obvious belief is of god.

Was 'god' ever proven?
Has divine intervention possible? Can it be proven?

None of those questions could be answered with a yes, could they?

God didn't create the world, he doesn't exist.

Evolution is real, look at the galapagos islands, fine example of evolution. Look at the tortoises and finches there.

Edit - Also, look at many of the fossils that have been found out animals/fish millions of years ago you can see they are different today - hence they have evolved

From: cycrosism
God didn't create the world, he doesn't exist.

Evolution is real, look at the galapagos islands, fine example of evolution. Look at the tortoises and finches there.

I dont wanna turn this in to a god vs evoulution thread



but how the hell is looking at tourtises disproving god maybe god muttated them himself so that they could do w/e it is that they are doing

From: noidea
From previous threads, you're obvious belief is of god.

Was 'god' ever proven?
Has divine intervention possible? Can it be proven?

None of those questions could be answered with a yes, could they?

Considered spam.

@cycrosism

Spam to.

Im just asking about Evolution.

How was cycrocism's post spam? He made 3 valid points, 2 on-topic.
Lets not turn this into another "god" thread, hey.

Evolution has not been fully proven, because for proof they need complete sets of fossils etc and the chances of finding even 1 in-tact, good condition fossil is extremely small - so the chance of finding a fossil for each "stage" for a creature that perfectly shows each step and thus proves evolution is nearly nonexistant. Especially since most of the time, fossilisation conditions werent met (it requires quite specific conditions and then a LOT of luck to not get destroyed over millions of years and then get found in what, the last few hundred years?) so there wouldnt of been fossils for most things in the first place.

Natural selection is a very scientifically accepted phenomenon. If you stood up in a room full of scientists and said evolution is false, you would be laughed at.

From: cycrosism
God didn't create the world, he doesn't exist.

Evolution is real, look at the galapagos islands, fine example of evolution. Look at the tortoises and finches there.

Edit - Also, look at many of the fossils that have been found out animals/fish millions of years ago you can see they are different today - hence they have evolved

I think many Christians, or at least those who believe in God, will not deny the fact that micro-evolution exists. However, we have a hard time believing that the human race evolved from bacteria.

Because at the Galapagos islands, one island has high bushes/trees and one has low shrubs and plants. On the 1st island with the high bushes, the tortoises have a "arch back", they have evolved to their environment (Natural selection as Claw stated before). On the other island they have a normal dome back.

Dome back:
Arch back:
Also I cbf explaining the birds

Let's get some Nietzsche up in hurr.

"There are no facts, only interpretations."

Meaning that there is no ONE right answer. People see, feel, touch, taste, and hear things differently from one another.

In a four/five (can't remember) disked set about philosophers (Called "existentialism and the meaning of life" or something), the guy talking about Nietzsche interprets it as "There is no truth; there are only truths."

Evolution and creationism/intelligent design/whatever you wanna call a higher power affecting us to be how we are are quite alike. You (OP) believe that God (or gods) made us the best we could be. And people like me who accept evolution as true merely think that it took a much longer time and happened because everything on Earth that we see always needs to be better. ^^

It's kinda silly to say that one side is false if you've no proof of your own side. :3

Scientist have almost confirmed that it was possible to create a cell and other things required for life to work from basic ingredients from when the Earth was forming. Amino acids, cell membrane, DNA, ribosome etc…

Mutations in DNA over billions of years must of lead some where?

Lol at YoHoJo

From: The Claw
How was cycrocism's post spam? He made 3 valid points, 2 on-topic.
Lets not turn this into another "god" thread, hey.

Evolution has not been fully proven, because for proof they need complete sets of fossils etc and the chances of finding even 1 in-tact, good condition fossil is extremely small - so the chance of finding a fossil for each "stage" for a creature that perfectly shows each step and thus proves evolution is nearly nonexistant. Especially since most of the time, fossilisation conditions werent met (it requires quite specific conditions and then a LOT of luck to not get destroyed over millions of years and then get found in what, the last few hundred years?) so there wouldnt of been fossils for most things in the first place.

Natural selection is a very scientifically accepted phenomenon. If you stood up in a room full of scientists and said evolution is false, you would be laughed at.

No I dont say its false. I said his post was spam because hes saying god doesnt exist, when the thread is about Evolution. No hard feelings cycrosism :).


I do believe in evolution. I just wanted to know what proof they have that we were originated from apes etc etc.

Quran and Evolution - Origin of Life:

Science tells us now that the life on earth originated from water. Even today while we are exploring the galaxies and actively searching for life on other planets, the 1 st question we ask; is there any water on that planet to sustain life, because without water life is impossible. Quran 1400 years ago, before the discovery of science, said the same thing :

"Do not the unbeliever see that the heaven and the earth were joined together, then we set them asunder and we got every living thing out of water. Will they then not believe".
[chapter 21 - verse 30]

First living thing was algae in plant kingdom then animal kingdom started. Quran makes reference to plant kingdom.
[chapter 21 - verse 53]

"(God is the one who) sent down the water from the sky and thereby brought forth pairs of plants, each separate from the other." The verse also points out the sexual reproduction in plant kingdom, much before science discovered it. In 13/3 male and female fruit plants are described.
[chapter 13 - verse 3]

^ Similarly reference is made to the water origin of animals:-

"Allah Almighty (God) created every animal from water. Among living objects there are some which crawl on their bellies, some walk on two legs and some on four".
[chapter 24 - verse 45]

No, the theory of evolution has not been proven, nor has the theory of gravity, nor has the rest of science which is pretty much all theory until proven wrong. Don't worry, you won't fall off the earth in Australia, 'theory' does not mean shaky, to be doubted, unstable, unlikely to be right, etc, as Richard Dawkins says, science is not so arrogant to say that gravity is an absolute proven fact.

If you want to know the evidence supporting the theory, you will have a lot of reading to do. You could start with human/'apes' DNA if you want. However that evidence would also support the theory that some deity created DNA and did this deliberately to test faith or something.

From: scubajesus
There's hardly anything in existence that can be proven.
This color. While most likely everyone on this forum, and millions of other people would agree it is blue, you can't prove that it is blue. You can just make an educated guess that it is the color blue.

To cut to the chase, it is not proven that humans evolved from another life form if that's what you're poking at. There is plenty evidence that evolution itself exists, such as how influenza evolves.

that's some philosophy there saying you can't prove the color you are seeing is blue. But if you look at things like in that sense, then like you said there's hardly anything in existence that can be proven, even existence, you wouldn't know if you really exist or anyone else does.

??? But, but, there are massive amounts of evidence supporting evolution!!! The right question imho -in a religious context- ought to be:

Evolution: Fact or Fiction?

Evolution is an established scientific theory, just like Einstein's theory of relativity.

It explains observations and makes testable predictions. There have been no observations made that contradict it.

So as much as I respect anyone's opinion to believe in a creator/creators, if you want to deny evolution, you deny the scientific method, and with it most scientific observations that we take to be fact (like Boreas said).

And my personal opinion is that the singularity that became the Big Bang was pooped out of a black hole.

From: Tim0suprem0
And my personal opinion is that the singularity that became the Big Bang was pooped out of a black hole.

I think you mean popped?

From: scubajesus
There's hardly anything in existence that can be proven.
This color. While most likely everyone on this forum, and millions of other people would agree it is blue, you can't prove that it is blue. You can just make an educated guess that it is the color blue.

To cut to the chase, it is not proven that humans evolved from another life form if that's what you're poking at. There is plenty evidence that evolution itself exists, such as how influenza evolves.

Erm, if you think it's not then I'd like to know what's your standard for proof?

It's proven enough so that the whole educated world thinks it's true.
Actually evolution was a topic of debate in the early Greek 2500 years ago.
"Those stayed alive who best adapted to the enviroment and continued breeding." - some philosoph whose name I'm too lazy to check from the science magazine I read yesterday.

From: i luffs yeww
I think you mean popped?

Nope :)

Intelligent design is the religious way of evolution. Basically the same things, just that intelligent design states that a higher power helps evolution along. So even religious people believe it's true.

@Tim, Defecation is the final act of digestion by which organisms eliminate solid, semisolid or liquid waste material (feces) from the digestive tract via the anus.

A universe cannot poop.

Your move, Sherlock.

:norris:

I think y'all need to read up on some good ole philosophers before you can even talk about scientific stuff. For instance, read up on Hume's "An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding” sections 1-7 should be fine. This stuff will make you think about science completely differently, mainly because he points out one main flaw that many sciences are based upon (primarily physics): there is really no "cause and effect." Good stuff to think about (and to READ). I would encourage all of you to read these sections, whether you agree with him or not.

Now concerning the actual validity of evolution; no it has not been proven. But what can be proven? Descartes bases his meditations upon the thought that only the entity of "I" can be proven. From there he tries to branch off and prove other trues. People believe that everything could be proven, but whether you use inductive reasoning like Hume, or deductive reasoning like Descartes, little can actually be proven.

Lastly, concerning the ignorant people bashing on religious views, I think you are completely missing the point. When one classifies something to be in the realm of “science”, connotations immediately imply that since it is in the realm of science, it is true. When something is placed in the realm of “religion”, the connotations of religion imply faith to some extent. We are dealing with something that is being pushed as “true”, and we are merely being skeptical and saying that there is absolutely no proof that macro-evolution is true. You people are turning this around and saying that a theology which is based upon FAITH (put into the religion realm) is not true… Guess what, faith does not mean “provable beyond all doubt.” In fact, it doesn’t even necessarily mean provable. Stop trying to turn this into a debate between two completely different things.

Evolution has more proof and is more logical than any other "creation theory" I've heard from. I find ancient stories written middle-eastern tribes to keep people in order and make them give away their money less compelling than all the information backing up evolution, but of course that's just my opinion..

From: i luffs yeww
Intelligent design is the religious way of evolution. Basically the same things, just that intelligent design states that a higher power helps evolution along.

Intelligent design is creationism labeled as science, although it has been proven over and over not to be science. The only point of it is getting religion (mainly christianity) taught in schools as science, which it obviously isn't.. I truly hope it will never be taught, mainly for the same reasons we don't have alchemy taught as an alternate to chemistry either.

From: GoF
Evolution has more proof and is more logical than any other "creation theory" I've heard from.

Ugh read the last paragraph of my previous post. You are comparing things that pertain to two entirely different realms! Also, provide sources for your claim: "evolution has more proof."

From: GoF

Intelligent design is creationism labeled as science, although it has been proven over and over not to be science.

No, intelligent design is simply a theological view on how the world was created (aka Creationism). And I do not understand how to can be proven over and over not to be a science (by saying something can be proven to be a science or not, you are saying that it must be true to be a science. This belief reaffirms by previous post).

From: GoF
I truly hope it will never be taught, mainly for the same reasons we don't have alchemy taught as an alternate to chemistry either.

All right! first statement that is not a claim! :D It seems like you parallel the beliefs of Galileo. :) I would have to agree with you on this opinion, but i personally would like to see teachers emphasizing the point that evolution is not proven, but is the most common explanation for how life/humans came about. Too many teachers teach that evolution is set in stone, when it is not.

With the scientific method, theories are set up so they are very easy to destroy if only the evidence came up.

To take evolution as an example of something that is very easy to disprove, all you need to do is find a single genuine fossil in the wrong period. A commonly cited example is a fossil rabbit in the precambrian. You could also try to find a single animal who's DNA does not fit into the known tree of life.
All it would take is a single example. And its never been found despite many people trying hard for over 100 years.

Evolution is as proven as any theory in science. It often makes little sense to call it a theory in everyday language, people just say it's a fact. Its just as much of a fact as the fact that the earth is round, that all matter is made from atoms and that gravity keeps us on the ground.

I feel it would be dishonest for a science teacher to emphases that evolution isn't proven, to artificially cast doubt on it. (no doubt many interested parties would like it)
Its probably more of a topic for a philosophy class, when students are introduced to the idea of nothing actually being proven.
"You know the earth could be flat, we haven't actually proved it is round"
"You know atoms might not be real"
"You know evolution might be wrong"


Religion, by contrast sets its postulates up so they are very difficult or impossible to disprove. Many are unfalseifiable. In fact history shows time and time again how when a new piece of knowledge is uncovered, religions change their view saying it was only a metaphore or that they were actually right all along. This dishonest shifting the goalposts should warn anybody against using religion as a path to knowledge.

The scientific method of testing ideas against experiment is a real path to knowledge and understanding. Religious revelation is not.

From: Yakman
With the scientific method, theories are set up so they are very easy to destroy if only the evidence came up.

To take evolution as an example of something that is very easy to disprove, all you need to do is find a single genuine fossil in the wrong period. A commonly cited example is a fossil rabbit in the precambrian. You could also try to find a single animal who's DNA does not fit into the known tree of life.
All it would take is a single example. And its never been found despite many people trying hard for over 100 years.

Evolution is as proven as any theory in science. It often makes little sense to call it a theory in everyday language, people just say it's a fact. Its just as much of a fact as the fact that the earth is round, that all matter is made from atoms and that gravity keeps us on the ground.

I feel it would be dishonest for a science teacher to emphases that evolution isn't proven, to artificially cast doubt on it. (no doubt many interested parties would like it)
Its probably more of a topic for a philosophy class, when students are introduced to the idea of nothing actually being proven.
"You know the earth could be flat, we haven't actually proved it is round"
"You know atoms might not be real"
"You know evolution might be wrong"


Religion, by contrast sets its postulates up so they are very difficult or impossible to disprove. Many are unfalseifiable. In fact history shows time and time again how when a new piece of knowledge is uncovered, religions change their view saying it was only a metaphore or that they were actually right all along. This dishonest shifting the goalposts should warn anybody against using religion as a path to knowledge.

The scientific method of testing ideas against experiment is a real path to knowledge and understanding. Religious revelation is not.

Wait wait wait, we have proven that the earth is relatively round, have we not? I'm guessing the fact that we fly around it and have images of it being round, and send satellites around it would prove the roundness of the earth?

My main point being that some things are possible to prove, it just takes the proper science.

We have not proven that it's not actually flat and MorganFreeman/TheMatrix/FlyingSpaghettiMonster is making it appear round to us.

Before I comment, I must say I enjoyed reading your post yakman.

From: Yakman
With the scientific method, theories are set up so they are very easy to destroy if only the evidence came up.

To take evolution as an example of something that is very easy to disprove, all you need to do is find a single genuine fossil in the wrong period. A commonly cited example is a fossil rabbit in the precambrian. You could also try to find a single animal who's DNA does not fit into the known tree of life.
All it would take is a single example. And its never been found despite many people trying hard for over 100 years.

Actually this is quite true. Very well thought out point, but just because something has not YET happened, does not mean it can not happen. Realistically there is a probability of some sort for ANYTHING to happen. These things might not have been found (I might look it up in a little bit to see if your claim is correct), but that does not mean that they will never be found.

From: Yakman
Evolution is as proven as any theory in science. It often makes little sense to call it a theory in everyday language, people just say it's a fact. Its just as much of a fact as the fact that the earth is round, that all matter is made from atoms and that gravity keeps us on the ground.

Evolution is, like you said, a theory. Theory != Fact. People are led to believe that a theory is a fact, which is not correct. Also, your claims of the earth being round and gravity and atoms are all Matters of Fact, and not Relations of Ideas. Since matters of facts are not founded upon necessity, then you really can not call them "facts", but rather call them theories.

From: Yakman
I feel it would be dishonest for a science teacher to emphases that evolution isn't proven, to artificially cast doubt on it. (no doubt many interested parties would like it).

Very interesting opinion, and I took note of the word "artificially." By saying this word, I am assuming you believe that this theory is actually a fact that can not be unproven. If so, then obviously you would not want it to be presented with doubts attached. But, it has never been proven and it can never fully be proven; that is why it is called a theory. And science is supposed to be accepting of doubt. Without doubt of theories, then we would all still believe strongly in a flat world, and any other previous theories. Without doubt, we can not advance scientifically.

From: Yakman
Its probably more of a topic for a philosophy class, when students are introduced to the idea of nothing actually being proven.
"You know the earth could be flat, we haven't actually proved it is round"
"You know atoms might not be real"
"You know evolution might be wrong"

You are absolutely right: it is the topic of a philosophy class. But since we are debating about whether is there any proof for evolution, why not use sources other than the standard "science" classes? If one can not even prove that evolution could have the potential to being true through philosophy, then why even bother debating on the topic? Now, I am not saying it does not have to potential for being true, because it does, but all I am saying is that one should not discredit philosophy within debating realms.

From: Yakman
Religion, by contrast sets its postulates up so they are very difficult or impossible to disprove. Many are unfalseifiable. In fact history shows time and time again how when a new piece of knowledge is uncovered, religions change their view saying it was only a metaphore or that they were actually right all along. This dishonest shifting the goalposts should warn anybody against using religion as a path to knowledge.

Very interesting :) . Source?

From: Yakman
The scientific method of testing ideas against experiment is a real path to knowledge and understanding. Religious revelation is not.

You think like Galileo too! :D Just like GoF. (Well, Galileo might or might not agree with the last sentence, not sure, will do even more research on his life and continue study his works).

Also just for a little bit of fun, please prove your claim. :) Please prove to me that the scientific method is a real path to obtaining knowledge. All I see it as is a way to find probability. It gives no concrete answer to anything.

From: GoF
Intelligent design is creationism labeled as science, although it has been proven over and over not to be science. The only point of it is getting religion (mainly christianity) taught in schools as science, which it obviously isn't.. I truly hope it will never be taught, mainly for the same reasons we don't have alchemy taught as an alternate to chemistry either.

Unless they change the first amendment of the constitution, it won't be taught in public schools. It'd be unconstitutional.

From: i luffs yeww

Your move, Sherlock.

:norris:

EDIT: Forgot to cite my sources :norris::

S.W. Hawking , Particle Creation by Black Holes. , University of Cambridge (1974)

L. Susskind, "Some Speculations About Black Hole Entropy in String Theory, '' Rutgers University Report No. RU-93-44, hep-th/9309145, 1993.

M. Maggiore, Phys. Lett. B 333, 39 (1994) [SPIRES]; ``Horizon quantization and thermodynamics of the 2+1 black hole,'' Pisa Report No. IFUP TH 43/94, 1994.

P. Kovtun, D.T. Son and A.O. Starinets, Viscosity in strongly interacting quantum field theories from black hole physics 2005 Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 111601 [hep-th/0405231]

From: x[Warrior]x3500
Very interesting :) . Source?

Common knowledge. The Bible went through many revisions, it was changed every time a science discovered new things.

Found this:

while looking for this:

Most scientists believe in God.

Surely you don't believe that scientists with personal faith go into the lab every day and write "God did it" in their notebooks…

Even if one believes that "God did it", many people ALSO believe that through scientific inquiry, mankind is able to learn HOW "God did it".

If you look back historically starting with the explosion of science following the Renaissance, the vast majority of scientific giants were men of faith that were trying to better understand the mind of God.

You see, even scientists who believe in God don't try to use their faith to gain knowledge about the universe. Instead they use the scientific method which is much more successful.

There's no denying evolution (or something very similar) that has taken place during the history of the universe.

Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion - Isaac Newton

"I don't know who did it, it must have been God."

That's the clear insinuation of the above post.


Its quite funny how some people believe that the gaps in humanity's knowledge are by default filled by God.

From: Yakman
"I don't know who did it, it must have been God."

That's the clear insinuation of the above post.


Its quite funny how some people believe that the gaps in humanity's knowledge are by default filled by God.

The insinuation was that evolution doesn't disprove God.

I was talking about the Newton quote.

Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion - Isaac Newton

Its clear what you were trying to say here, especially with the use of the word who.
Humanity doesn't know who set the planets into motion, so God, by default, did it.

From: Yakman

Its clear what you were trying to say here, especially with the use of the word who.
Humanity doesn't know who set the planets into motion, so god, by default, did it.

Fsm.

From: tim0suprem0
Fsm.

Ipu.

We do know evolution does happen and has happened, but we have not proved where we came from… nothing explains it with proof… as far as we know we were dropped off here by aliens! <_<

Simple things we've seen evolve and the dna change, such as sickle cell which started in Africa.. the aids virus can't attach onto the cells & one other virus.. malaria?
which is basic human evolution