EvC Forum: Too Many Flaws with Evolution

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Too Many Flaws with Evolution

Theodoric

Member

Posts: 9201

From: Northwest, WI, USA

Joined: 08-15-2005

Member Rating: 3.2

Normal Thread Display

Message 76 of 144 (499397)
02-18-2009 1:59 PM

Reply to: Message 75 by John 10:10
02-18-2009 1:46 PM

As much as you and others would like to believe that the ToE has been proven from where life began to where man is today, the ToE is still a delusion.

Your belief, but do you have any facts to back up this belief.

You see the Theory of Evolution, is based upon facts. Your beliefs are based upon faith, no facts at all.

Please provide some evidence that evolution is a delusion.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 75 by John 10:10, posted 02-18-2009 1:46 PM		John 10:10 has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 78 by John 10:10, posted 02-18-2009 2:13 PM		Theodoric has replied

Theodoric

Member

Posts: 9201

From: Northwest, WI, USA

Joined: 08-15-2005

Member Rating: 3.2

Normal Thread Display

Message 81 of 144 (499407)
02-18-2009 2:28 PM

Reply to: Message 78 by John 10:10
02-18-2009 2:13 PM

oh your letting your ignorance show

Before you start arguing against something, you really should know what you are arguing against.

We really do not like equivocation here. oh I guess I better define. It is a logical fallacy.

Equivocation is the illegitimate switching of the meaning of a term during the reasoning.

You are switching the definition of Theory

In science a theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. (in other words, facts)
The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic. A law describes a single action, whereas a theory explains an entire group of related phenomena.

Source
Scientific Theory, Law, and Hypothesis Explained | Wilstar.com

There is nothing higher than a Scientific Theory to explain a group of phenomena. You can't go any higher. Theories are the big leagues.

You see how that works. I include facts and sources with my statements. Not just random statements with no basis in reality and fact.

Show me the evidence where man has proven in a lab that a single cell life creature can evolve into a fully grown man?

Here we go with another fallacy. The tried and true always debunked and discredited creationist strawman. Where does the Theory of Evolution say this should happen. Give me one example of a believer in Evolution proposing anything like this could or should happen.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 78 by John 10:10, posted 02-18-2009 2:13 PM		John 10:10 has not replied

Theodoric

Member

Posts: 9201

From: Northwest, WI, USA

Joined: 08-15-2005

Member Rating: 3.2

Normal Thread Display

Message 87 of 144 (499417)
02-18-2009 2:57 PM

Reply to: Message 83 by John 10:10
02-18-2009 2:47 PM

Do you read what was posted?

A scientific theory is an explanation for observed, verified facts. It is not a hypothesis, that is something else all together.

Also, if you bothered with trying to understand that which you condemn, you would know that the Theory of Evolution says nothing about how life started.

Consequently, there is no scientific consensus on how life began

Do I need to explain this to you? That means how life began is not part of the Theory of Evolution.
Isn't it sad when you have to rely on deceptions and misunderstanding of data in order to justify your argument.

But then again you know all this, but have no other arguments then the old fallacies that you and your ilk trot out again and again.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 83 by John 10:10, posted 02-18-2009 2:47 PM		John 10:10 has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 95 by John 10:10, posted 02-18-2009 8:23 PM		Theodoric has replied

Theodoric

Member

Posts: 9201

From: Northwest, WI, USA

Joined: 08-15-2005

Member Rating: 3.2

Normal Thread Display

Message 98 of 144 (499493)
02-18-2009 8:52 PM

Reply to: Message 95 by John 10:10
02-18-2009 8:23 PM

Re: Do you read what was posted?

So you think Science can only happen in labs? Like mad scientists?

And when you prove in a lab how the facts came to be as they are to a high degree of accuracy, then the theory becomes a scientific law

Again your ignorance is showing. A Theory cannot be upgraded to a Law. They are different things. I explained earlier, but I guess I will repeat it.

The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic. A law describes a single action, whereas a theory explains an entire group of related phenomena.

Here is a link for you to read.
Scientific Theory, Law, and Hypothesis Explained | Wilstar.com

Again, I will repeat Scientfic Theories do not get upgraded to Scientfic Laws. They are different things.

So instead of proving the ToE actually works in a lab evolving from a single cell to a man, you rely on many many many theories how it possibly works. This may be true science to you, but not to me or to most other scientists who know what the scientific method is and how you use it to prove theories.

You prove time and time again that you have no idea what the scientific method is. I venture anyone that agrees with your idea of the scientific method is not a scientist. Maybe you would like to supply us with these scientists that agree with you on your "definition" of the scientific method.

Also, please supply a source for this definition.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 95 by John 10:10, posted 02-18-2009 8:23 PM		John 10:10 has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 106 by John 10:10, posted 02-18-2009 9:35 PM		Theodoric has replied

Theodoric

Member

Posts: 9201

From: Northwest, WI, USA

Joined: 08-15-2005

Member Rating: 3.2

Normal Thread Display

Message 100 of 144 (499495)
02-18-2009 8:58 PM

Reply to: Message 96 by John 10:10
02-18-2009 8:43 PM

It is called the establishement clause

The courts have upheld that the clause establishes the separation of church and state.

You can have any opinion on it that you want, but the courts do not agree with you.

Maybe we need another thread for this.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 96 by John 10:10, posted 02-18-2009 8:43 PM		John 10:10 has not replied

Theodoric

Member

Posts: 9201

From: Northwest, WI, USA

Joined: 08-15-2005

Member Rating: 3.2

Normal Thread Display

Message 105 of 144 (499501)
02-18-2009 9:24 PM

Reply to: Message 102 by John 10:10
02-18-2009 9:02 PM

Re: John, if you've got some spare time on your hands...

More than millions of year have passed to prove it. As a matter of fact billions of years of evolution have happened to prove it. You demand evolution to be something it is not. Your mind is so closed you wont even entertain looking at the evidence.

"Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up"

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 102 by John 10:10, posted 02-18-2009 9:02 PM		John 10:10 has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 109 by John 10:10, posted 02-18-2009 9:54 PM		Theodoric has replied

Theodoric

Member

Posts: 9201

From: Northwest, WI, USA

Joined: 08-15-2005

Member Rating: 3.2

Normal Thread Display

Message 107 of 144 (499505)
02-18-2009 9:41 PM

Reply to: Message 106 by John 10:10
02-18-2009 9:35 PM

WOW

I want you to read what you quoted.

If evidence supports a hypothesis, it is upgraded to a theory. If the theory then garners even more support, it may be upgraded to a law. This misconception may be reinforced by introductory science courses that treat hypotheses as "things we're not sure about yet" and that only explore established and accepted theories.

Read it. It says that the idea that a hypothesis becomes a theory and then a theory becomes a law, is a MISCONCEPTION.
You have to be able to read critically, not just make it read what you want it to say.

Now here is the kicker. Read this sentence

In fact, hypotheses, theories, and laws are rather like apples, oranges, and kumquats: one cannot grow into another, no matter how much fertilizer and water are offered.

Got it now?