The Big Bang, Abiogenesis, and Evolution

Ringo,I don't think it is rational in any sense to forget any understanding.

---

Thanks
trossthree

I suggested that you forget the words "absolute" and "proof" because you don't have any understanding of them. Neither has any value in discussions of science.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Chiroptera, The point with that is simple. It is my theory and it comes with some evidence, people I know that have died, watching them die, watching their actions, spontaneously become believers and start praying. A simple concept really. Anyways I am going off topic so im done here.P.S. In the end, in death, we all discover what we really believe, that's absolute.

---

Thanks
trossthree

Ringo,However, the words absolute and proof do have value in reality. Alot of people come to the EVC forum seeking truth in reality. Why else debate EVC.

---

Thanks
trossthree

Maybe they were just trying to get rid of you so that they could die in peace?

---

In many respects, the Bible was the world's first Wikipedia article. -- Doug Brown (quoted by Carlin Romano in The Chronicle Review)

Chiroptera,Oh that's typical, LOL. What a good way to defend your point. LOL. Anyways. Im done. Peace.

---

Thanks
trossthree

You can't divorce reality from science.Unless you can relate it to the Big Bang, Abiogenesis and Evolution somehow, we'll have to take your misunderstanding of science to another topic. If they're seeking The Truth™, they want a cult, not EvC.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Ringo,I came to the EVC forum to find truth(debate EVC). Alot of people here are wise and to hear what other peoples perceptions are on reality, such as Scientists, or yourself, jar,etc, is alot of help to me. However, to reduce an open mind to just Science is simply irrational. (I bet you liked my usage of the word irrational in that sentence/context, lol.) Anyways. I'm done here. We are OFF TOPIC. Peace.P.S. Originally I was a LDS. I have been reading these forums for years. The EVC forum is AWSOME in contrast to other forums. Now I am a Theistic Evolutionist. LOL. A cult, LOL. HAHAHAHAH, LOL.....Edited by trossthree, : err

---

Thanks
trossthree

I never said anything about "reducing" an open mind to "just" science.You demonstrated what your idea of an "open mind" is when you applauded CTD for his patently closed mind. I suspect that most evolutionists would ask you to get off our side until you learn something about what science is.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

And you don't have a clue why anyone would want a different term to include something that was not included under the previous term? You're objecting to them NOT redefining the original term? So that they could then keep the original term to mean what it had before?So this is one of your examples of a term where the definition changed?ROFLOL. Would you like to give us your definition of "life" that can be used? We actually looked at this problem on the Definition of Life and perhaps you would like to contribute to that thread.Would you like to demonstrate those several changes in definition? Or just make an assertion without supporting it? Like spontaneous generation? Or like early definitions of life?Overall your position seems pretty insubstantial to me.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : reworded

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Ringo,Science is the study of our physical and natural world(assumed reality). The way by which Science is studied is via the Scientific Method: Observation, Hypothesis, Prediction, Test(over and over again with different variables). In some cases if a theory has been rigorously tested and supported it is considered a fact(such as TOE and BIG BANG). Science does not deal in absolutes. I understand these things.Edited by trossthree, : comment

---

Thanks
trossthree

Not quite.Evolution is a fact. Period. It can be observed, just like gravity can be observed. Evolution would be a fact even if there never was a Theory of Evolution.A theory is an explanation of a fact. The Theory of Evolution explains how the fact of evolution works.As I understand it, the Big Bang is considered to be a fact by cosmologists. I'm not sure if there is a Big Bang Theory - i.e. an explanation of how the Big Bang happened.Abiogenesis is also considered to be a fact. Once there was no life, now there is life. It must have started somehow, somewhere. We have no complete explanation yet as to how it could have happened, but we have a lot of pieces of the puzzle. We likely never will have an explanation (theory) of how it did happen, since chemicals don't leave fossil evidence.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Ringo, The idea of evolution started with an observation. If there was no observation of evolution, how could we even know of the idea of evolution? True. However, a fact is not a fact unless a observation is made. Read about Georges Lematre. True. However, I do believe that the chemicals in fossils can bond with other chemicals which means chemicals can leave fossil evidence. I believe It depends on how the fossils are being stored.Edited by trossthree, : new commentsEdited by trossthree, : opsEdited by trossthree, : errEdited by trossthree, : change in wordsEdited by trossthree, : change...Edited by trossthree, : No reason given.Edited by trossthree, : No reason given.Edited by trossthree, : No reason given.Edited by trossthree, : No reason given.Edited by trossthree, : 1 more comment sorry.. lol..Edited by trossthree, : No reason given.Edited by trossthree, : No reason given.Edited by trossthree, : last one i hope lolEdited by trossthree, : del

---

Thanks
trossthree

Hardly. Going from, "In some cases if a theory has been rigorously tested and supported it is considered a fact," to, "A theory is an explanation of a fact," is no nitpick. It's a fundamental misunderstanding.The facts come first. There may or may not be a theory to explain them.A theory never "becomes" a fact.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Ringo,read my last post, I changed my comments.

---

Thanks
trossthree