| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
07 Mar 2006 11:59:09 PM |
| Object: |
Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
The people have spoken. When will the politicians and the courts ever
listen?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49153
Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll
Whopping 69 percent of Americans want alternate theories in classroom
A new poll shows 69 percent of Americans believe public school
teachers should present both the evidence for and against Darwinian
evolution.
The Zogby International survey indicated only 21 percent think biology
teachers should teach only Darwin's theory of evolution and the scientific
evidence that supports it.
A majority of Americans from every sub-group were at least twice as
likely to prefer this approach to science education, the Zogby study showed.
About 88 percent of Americans 18-29 years old were in support, along
with 73 percent of Republicans and 74 percent of independent voters.
Others who strongly support teaching the strengths and weaknesses of
evolutionary theory include African-Americans (69 percent), 35-54 year-olds
(70 percent) and Democrats (60 percent).
Casey Luskin, program officer for public policy and legal affairs with
Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture said while his group
does not favor mandating the teaching of intelligent design, "we do think it
is constitutional for teachers to discuss it precisely because the theory is
based upon scientific evidence not religious premises."
The Seattle-based Discovery Institute is the leading promoter of the
theory of Intelligent Design, which has been at the center of challenges in
federal court over the teaching of evolution in public school classes.
Advocates say it draws on recent discoveries in physics, biochemistry and
related disciplines that indicate some features of the natural world are
best explained as the product of an intelligent cause rather than an
undirected process such as natural selection.
"The public strongly agrees that students should be permitted to learn
about such evidence," Luskin said.
The Discovery Institute noted Americans also support students learning
about evidence for intelligent design alongside evolution in biology class -
77 percent.
Just over half - 51 percent - agree strongly with that. Only 19
percent disagree.
--
" The truth shall set you free "
.
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
13 Mar 2006 08:51:58 PM |
|
|
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1142036696.159103.54290@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <jackball@phs.con> wrote in message
news:cu_Pf.3230$Bj7.1029@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb18b$0$20702$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof, there's
not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't believe
you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less
true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the theory
of
gravity". Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping off a tall
building.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton had a
theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various theories to
explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact. Except an Evolutionazi.
Scientific evidence says it is a fact. Evolution has been documented
in the wild and in the laboratory. Only an educationally retarded
***** would find it questionable.
There is no evidence and I'm more educated than you are. And many scientists
more educated than you are say it's bunk.
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "mel turner" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
15 Mar 2006 04:31:04 PM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> wrote in message
news:_9qRf.8238$C7.3030@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1142036696.159103.54290@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
[snip]
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof,
there's
not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't
believe
you just gave me 90 yards.
Your "still a theory" is strong evidence you don't know what you're
talking about. A "theory" is as good as it gets in science; theories
don't grow up to become something else. It's "still a theory" that
ordinary matter is made of atoms. It's now a very strongly-supported
theory, but then so is the theory that living things have evolved.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less
true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the theory
of gravity".
And there are probably a lot of things you've never heard of. That
doesn't mean they don't exist:
http://www.google.com/search?Google+Search&as_epq=theory+of+gravity
http://www.google.com/search?Google+Search&as_epq=gravitational+theory
Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping off a tall
building.
And perhaps you should go test the Germ Theory of Disease?
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton had a
theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various theories
to
explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact. Except an Evolutionazi.
That's an outright falsehood, unless by "Evolutionazi" you mean an
educated person, anyone who understands science and especially
biology better than you do. [Which indeed seems likely.]
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
It's indeed a fact that evolution [both micro and macroevolution] is
observed to occur, and a fact that the evidence strongly shows that
it has occurred throughout the billions of years long history of life
on earth. There are theories that explain a lot about just how it
happens.
Scientific evidence says it is a fact. Evolution has been documented
in the wild and in the laboratory. Only an educationally retarded
***** would find it questionable.
Or, the sincerely deluded and/or willfully ignorant.
There is no evidence and I'm more educated than you are.
That's probably two falsehoods in one sentence. The first error is
rather strong evidence that the second claim is also false. At the
least it shows your claimed education isn't in any areas relevant
to evolutionary biology.
And many scientists more educated than you are say it's bunk.
Yet another outright falsehood.
There are a few scientists who are also creationists [but not while
they're actually doing science]. Very few if any are in relevant
scientific fields to evolutionary science, and none offer any valid
scientific arguments for their creationism, or have any research to
show for it.
It's just the usual fundamentalist religion and the usual false
attacks on science, plus an added illogical argument from bogus
authority: "See, 'so and so' has an advanced degree in hydraulic
engineering, and he's signed this creationist petition and has
written this article denouncing Darwinism. This proves creationism
is scientific after all."
cheers
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eden" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
09 Mar 2006 04:37:47 PM |
|
|
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <jackball@phs.con> wrote in message
news:cu_Pf.3230$Bj7.1029@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb18b$0$20702$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof, there's
not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't believe
you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the theory of
gravity". Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping off a tall
building.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton had a
theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various theories to
explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact.
Every real scientist says it is a fact, and they don't
incorrectly capitalize it as "Evolution", either.
Scientists disagree, somewhat, about how evolution
occurs, but *none* dispute that it occurs.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
09 Mar 2006 10:22:55 PM |
|
|
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:%62Qf.2046$k75.19@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <jackball@phs.con> wrote in message
news:cu_Pf.3230$Bj7.1029@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb18b$0$20702$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof, there's
not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't believe
you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the theory of
gravity". Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping off a tall
building.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton had a
theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various theories to
explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact.
Every real scientist says it is a fact, and they don't incorrectly
capitalize it as "Evolution", either. Scientists disagree, somewhat, about
how evolution occurs, but *none* dispute that it occurs.
And you are...............who?
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eden" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
09 Mar 2006 10:40:56 PM |
|
|
bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:%62Qf.2046$k75.19@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <jackball@phs.con> wrote in message
news:cu_Pf.3230$Bj7.1029@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb18b$0$20702$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof, there's
not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't believe
you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the theory of
gravity". Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping off a tall
building.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton had a
theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various theories to
explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact.
Every real scientist says it is a fact, and they don't incorrectly
capitalize it as "Evolution", either. Scientists disagree, somewhat, about
how evolution occurs, but *none* dispute that it occurs.
And you are...............who?
Irrelevant, little bammie. Deal with the facts.
Evolution is a fact.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
10 Mar 2006 08:50:04 AM |
|
|
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:sr7Qf.9349$S25.3614@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:%62Qf.2046$k75.19@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <jackball@phs.con> wrote in message
news:cu_Pf.3230$Bj7.1029@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb18b$0$20702$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof,
there's not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't
believe you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less
true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the theory
of gravity". Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping off a tall
building.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton had a
theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various theories to
explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact.
Every real scientist says it is a fact, and they don't incorrectly
capitalize it as "Evolution", either. Scientists disagree, somewhat,
about how evolution occurs, but *none* dispute that it occurs.
And you are...............who?
Irrelevant, little bammie. Deal with the facts. Evolution is a fact.
Prove it.
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ichimusai" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
10 Mar 2006 12:14:31 PM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> writes:
[...]
Irrelevant, little bammie. Deal with the facts. Evolution is a
fact.
Prove it.
This is not math so proof would have to be changed to evidence. Just
like gravity is a fact and a theory to describe what we observe we
also do observe evolution happening all around us and the theory that
has formed explains how this is happening. There are some very good
on-line sources for learning more about this, see some of the
following links for a start.
Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of a
population over time. That this happens is a fact which is not
disputed. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent of
living organisms from shared ancestors.
The evidence for historical evolution - genetic, fossil, anatomical,
etc. - is so overwhelming that it is also considered a fact. The
theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause evolution. So
evolution is both a fact and a theory.
Evolution is a Fact and a Theory FAQ
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
Introduction to Evolutionary Biology FAQ
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html and the Five
Major Misconceptions about Evolution FAQ
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html#proof
--
http://ichimusai.org/
19:10:00 up 9 days, 5:24, 2 users, load average: 0.37, 0.16, 0.05
AI is definitely artificial, but not very intelligent
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
13 Mar 2006 08:50:17 PM |
|
|
"Ichimusai" <ichi@ichimusai.org> wrote in message
news:m3irqmqi9k.fsf@ichimusai.dyndns.org...
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> writes:
[...]
Irrelevant, little bammie. Deal with the facts. Evolution is a
fact.
Prove it.
This is not math so proof would have to be changed to evidence. Just
like gravity is a fact and a theory to describe what we observe we
also do observe evolution happening all around us and the theory that
has formed explains how this is happening. There are some very good
on-line sources for learning more about this, see some of the
following links for a start.
Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of a
population over time. That this happens is a fact which is not
disputed. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent of
living organisms from shared ancestors.
The evidence for historical evolution - genetic, fossil, anatomical,
etc. - is so overwhelming that it is also considered a fact. The
theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause evolution. So
evolution is both a fact and a theory.
You know nothing.
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ichimusai" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
14 Mar 2006 03:40:41 PM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> writes:
[...]
Prove it.
This is not math so proof would have to be changed to evidence.
Just like gravity is a fact and a theory to describe what we
observe we also do observe evolution happening all around us and
the theory that has formed explains how this is happening. There
are some very good on-line sources for learning more about this,
see some of the following links for a start.
Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of
a population over time. That this happens is a fact which is not
disputed. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent of
living organisms from shared ancestors.
The evidence for historical evolution - genetic, fossil,
anatomical, etc. - is so overwhelming that it is also considered a
fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause
evolution. So evolution is both a fact and a theory.
You know nothing.
That's all you have to say?
Bwahahaha! You fundies are too funny.
--
http://ichimusai.org/
22:39:00 up 13 days, 8:54, 3 users, load average: 0.04, 0.08, 0.07
Biker: "You're Hells Angels, then?
What chapter are you from?"
Death: "Revelations, Chapter Six."
-- Terry Pratchett & Neil Gaiman,
"Good Omens"
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
14 Mar 2006 05:34:37 PM |
|
|
"Ichimusai" <ichi@ichimusai.org> wrote in message
news:m3veugu2li.fsf@ichimusai.dyndns.org...
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> writes:
[...]
Prove it.
This is not math so proof would have to be changed to evidence.
Just like gravity is a fact and a theory to describe what we
observe we also do observe evolution happening all around us and
the theory that has formed explains how this is happening. There
are some very good on-line sources for learning more about this,
see some of the following links for a start.
Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of
a population over time. That this happens is a fact which is not
disputed. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent of
living organisms from shared ancestors.
The evidence for historical evolution - genetic, fossil,
anatomical, etc. - is so overwhelming that it is also considered a
fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause
evolution. So evolution is both a fact and a theory.
You know nothing.
That's all you have to say?
Bwahahaha! You fundies are too funny.
When someone says that something can be both a fact and a theory at the same
time, he might as well start barking or whinnying liks a horse.
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ichimusai" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
15 Mar 2006 12:42:19 PM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> writes:
[...]
The evidence for historical evolution - genetic, fossil,
anatomical, etc. - is so overwhelming that it is also considered
a fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that
cause evolution. So evolution is both a fact and a theory.
You know nothing.
That's all you have to say?
Bwahahaha! You fundies are too funny.
When someone says that something can be both a fact and a theory at
the same time, he might as well start barking or whinnying liks a
horse.
Gravity is a fact and a theory at the same time. You just don't
understand what a scientific theory means.
--
http://ichimusai.org/
19:41:01 up 14 days, 5:56, 1 user, load average: 0.42, 0.14, 0.04
AI is definitely artificial, but not very intelligent
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Maxwell Edison" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
14 Mar 2006 07:51:34 AM |
|
|
In article <o8qRf.8233$C7.6234@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, bam at
mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net says...
"Ichimusai" <ichi@ichimusai.org> wrote in message
This is not math so proof would have to be changed to evidence. Just
like gravity is a fact and a theory to describe what we observe we
also do observe evolution happening all around us and the theory that
has formed explains how this is happening. There are some very good
on-line sources for learning more about this, see some of the
following links for a start.
Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of a
population over time. That this happens is a fact which is not
disputed. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent of
living organisms from shared ancestors.
The evidence for historical evolution - genetic, fossil, anatomical,
etc. - is so overwhelming that it is also considered a fact. The
theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause evolution. So
evolution is both a fact and a theory.
You know nothing.
BAM
Bam must be the "missing link."
--
"There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." - Johann
Goethe
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ichimusai" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
14 Mar 2006 03:42:40 PM |
|
|
Maxwell Edison <ME@goawayspammers.org> writes:
In article <o8qRf.8233$C7.6234@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, bam at
mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net says...
"Ichimusai" <ichi@ichimusai.org> wrote in message
This is not math so proof would have to be changed to evidence.
Just like gravity is a fact and a theory to describe what we
observe we also do observe evolution happening all around us and
the theory that has formed explains how this is happening. There
are some very good on-line sources for learning more about this,
see some of the following links for a start.
Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of
a population over time. That this happens is a fact which is not
disputed. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent
of living organisms from shared ancestors.
The evidence for historical evolution - genetic, fossil,
anatomical, etc. - is so overwhelming that it is also considered a
fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause
evolution. So evolution is both a fact and a theory.
You know nothing.
Bam must be the "missing link."
He is missing far more than a link...
--
http://ichimusai.org/
22:41:00 up 13 days, 8:56, 3 users, load average: 0.22, 0.14, 0.09
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
exposing the country to danger."
-- Hermann Goering
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
10 Mar 2006 07:45:02 PM |
|
|
bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:sr7Qf.9349$S25.3614@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:%62Qf.2046$k75.19@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <jackball@phs.con> wrote in message
news:cu_Pf.3230$Bj7.1029@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb18b$0$20702$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof,
there's not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't
believe you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less
true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the theory
of gravity". Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping off a tall
building.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton had a
theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various theories to
explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact.
Every real scientist says it is a fact, and they don't incorrectly
capitalize it as "Evolution", either. Scientists disagree, somewhat,
about how evolution occurs, but *none* dispute that it occurs.
And you are...............who?
Irrelevant, little bammie. Deal with the facts. Evolution is a fact.
Prove it.
Prove that George Bush is the President of the U.S. I don't think you
can; I think you have only a "mere theory" that he is.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
10 Mar 2006 07:50:41 PM |
|
|
bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:sr7Qf.9349$S25.3614@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:%62Qf.2046$k75.19@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <jackball@phs.con> wrote in message
news:cu_Pf.3230$Bj7.1029@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb18b$0$20702$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof,
there's not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't
believe you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less
true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the theory
of gravity". Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping off a tall
building.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton had a
theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various theories to
explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact.
Every real scientist says it is a fact, and they don't incorrectly
capitalize it as "Evolution", either. Scientists disagree, somewhat,
about how evolution occurs, but *none* dispute that it occurs.
And you are...............who?
Irrelevant, little bammie. Deal with the facts. Evolution is a fact.
Prove it.
When non-biologists talk about biological evolution they often confuse
two different aspects of the definition. On the one hand there is the
question of whether or not modern organisms have evolved from older
ancestral organisms or whether modern species are continuing to change
over time. On the other hand there are questions about the mechanism of
the observed changes... how did evolution occur? Biologists consider
the existence of biological evolution to be a fact. It can be
demonstrated today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in
the past is overwhelming. However, biologists readily admit that they
are less certain of the exact mechanism of evolution; there are several
theories of the mechanism of evolution.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
Also at the same page:
It is time for students of the evolutionary process, especially those
who have been misquoted and used by the creationists, to state clearly
that evolution is a fact, not theory, and that what is at issue within
biology are questions of details of the process and the relative
importance of different mechanisms of evolution. It is a fact that the
earth with liquid water, is more than 3.6 billion years old. It is a
fact that cellular life has been around for at least half of that
period and that organized multicellular life is at least 800 million
years old. It is a fact that major life forms now on earth were not at
all represented in the past. There were no birds or mammals 250 million
years ago. It is a fact that major life forms of the past are no longer
living. There used to be dinosaurs and Pithecanthropus, and there are
none now. It is a fact that all living forms come from previous living
forms. Therefore, all present forms of life arose from ancestral forms
that were different. Birds arose from nonbirds and humans from
nonhumans. No person who pretends to any understanding of the natural
world can deny these facts any more than she or he can deny that the
earth is round, rotates on its axis, and revolves around the sun. --
R.C. Lewontin
Also:
In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact"--part
of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to
hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist argument:
evolution is "only" a theory and intense debate now rages about many
aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and
scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what
confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this
argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I
devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a
scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in
the world of science--that is, not believed in the scientific community
to be as infallible as it once was."
Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories
are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty.
Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that
explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate
rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation
replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves
in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like
ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some
other yet to be discovered.
Stephen J. Gould
But all this is casting pearls before swine, little bammie. You
wouldn't recognize a fact if one came up and punched you in your nose.
You are a *believer*, little bammie, not a thinker. That's an insult,
by the way.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
10 Mar 2006 09:21:47 AM |
|
|
bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:sr7Qf.9349$S25.3614@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:%62Qf.2046$k75.19@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <jackball@phs.con> wrote in message
news:cu_Pf.3230$Bj7.1029@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb18b$0$20702$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof,
there's not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't
believe you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less
true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the theory
of gravity". Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping off a tall
building.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton had a
theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various theories to
explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact.
Every real scientist says it is a fact, and they don't incorrectly
capitalize it as "Evolution", either. Scientists disagree, somewhat,
about how evolution occurs, but *none* dispute that it occurs.
And you are...............who?
Irrelevant, little bammie. Deal with the facts. Evolution is a fact.
Prove it.
Australopithecus. Take care now. Bye bye then.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and in every age, the priest *
* has been hostile to liberty. He is always in *
* alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in *
* return for protection to his own." *
* --Jefferson (in a letter to H. Spafford, 1814) *
****************************************************
--
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
10 Mar 2006 08:03:20 PM |
|
|
true-believer/non-thinker bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:sr7Qf.9349$S25.3614@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:%62Qf.2046$k75.19@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <jackball@phs.con> wrote in message
news:cu_Pf.3230$Bj7.1029@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb18b$0$20702$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof,
there's not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't
believe you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less
true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the theory
of gravity". Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping off a tall
building.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton had a
theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various theories to
explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact.
Every real scientist says it is a fact, and they don't incorrectly
capitalize it as "Evolution", either. Scientists disagree, somewhat,
about how evolution occurs, but *none* dispute that it occurs.
And you are...............who?
Irrelevant, little bammie. Deal with the facts. Evolution is a fact.
Prove it.
Finally, there is an epistemological argument against evolution as
fact. Some readers of these newsgroups point out that nothing in
science can ever be "proven" and this includes evolution. According to
this argument, the probability that evolution is the correct
explanation of life as we know it may approach 99.9999...9% but it will
never be 100%. Thus evolution cannot be a fact. This kind of argument
might be appropriate in a philosophy class (it is essentially correct)
but it won't do in the real world. A "fact," as Stephen J. Gould
pointed out (see above), means something that is so highly probable
that it would be silly [actually, irrational] not to accept it. This
point has also been made by others who contest the nit-picking
epistemologists.
I like this one: There's a passage from "The High Window", one of
Raymond Chandler's "Philip Marlowe" novels. A police detective named
Jesse Breeze is telling Marlowe something he knows about a murder case.
Marlowe asks him how he knows it. "I know it," Breeze said, spreading
his hands. "Look, there are things you know because you have them down
in black and white. And there are things you know because they are
reasonable and have to be so."
Evolution as a detectable phenomenon is a fact because it is reasonable
and has to be so, given what we find. That's just how it is, little
true-believer bammie.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
09 Mar 2006 10:47:39 PM |
|
|
Eden wrote:
bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:%62Qf.2046$k75.19@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <jackball@phs.con> wrote in message
news:cu_Pf.3230$Bj7.1029@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb18b$0$20702$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science
with proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does
have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof,
there's not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't
believe you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less
true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the
theory of gravity". Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping
off a tall building.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton
had a theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various
theories to explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact.
Every real scientist says it is a fact, and they don't incorrectly
capitalize it as "Evolution", either. Scientists disagree, somewhat,
about how evolution occurs, but *none* dispute that it occurs.
And you are...............who?
Irrelevant, little bammie. Deal with the facts. Evolution is a fact.
Bam wouldn't know a fact if it took up residence in his house and ate
all his cheese.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and in every age, the priest *
* has been hostile to liberty. He is always in *
* alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in *
* return for protection to his own." *
* --Jefferson (in a letter to H. Spafford, 1814) *
****************************************************
--
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
10 Mar 2006 08:50:48 AM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:441105e5$0$20689$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
Eden wrote:
bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:%62Qf.2046$k75.19@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <jackball@phs.con> wrote in message
news:cu_Pf.3230$Bj7.1029@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb18b$0$20702$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science
with proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have
a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof,
there's not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't
believe you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less
true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the
theory of gravity". Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping
off a tall building.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton had
a theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various theories
to explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact.
Every real scientist says it is a fact, and they don't incorrectly
capitalize it as "Evolution", either. Scientists disagree, somewhat,
about how evolution occurs, but *none* dispute that it occurs.
And you are...............who?
Irrelevant, little bammie. Deal with the facts. Evolution is a fact.
Bam wouldn't know a fact if it took up residence in his house and ate all
his cheese.
Lets just say I wouldn't want to be a defendant with you guys as jurors.
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ichimusai" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
10 Mar 2006 12:15:27 PM |
|
|
"bam" <mcca5761@bellsouthblahblah.net> writes:
[...]
Lets just say I wouldn't want to be a defendant with you guys as jurors.
You'd rather have a stoning crowd like in the "good old days"?
--
http://ichimusai.org/
19:14:00 up 9 days, 5:28, 2 users, load average: 0.14, 0.12, 0.05
"Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
10 Mar 2006 09:22:27 AM |
|
|
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:441105e5$0$20689$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
Eden wrote:
bam wrote:
"Eden" <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> wrote in message
news:%62Qf.2046$k75.19@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <jackball@phs.con> wrote in message
news:cu_Pf.3230$Bj7.1029@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb18b$0$20702$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science
with proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have
a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof,
there's not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't
believe you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less
true.
That's a laugher. I've never heard anyone use the phrase, "the
theory of gravity". Perhaps you should test this theory by jumping
off a tall building.
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure it. Newton had
a theory of gravity; Einstein has a somewhat different theory.
Gravity is a fact. Evolution is a fact. There are various theories
to explain both.
Nobody says Evolution is a fact.
Every real scientist says it is a fact, and they don't incorrectly
capitalize it as "Evolution", either. Scientists disagree, somewhat,
about how evolution occurs, but *none* dispute that it occurs.
And you are...............who?
Irrelevant, little bammie. Deal with the facts. Evolution is a fact.
Bam wouldn't know a fact if it took up residence in his house and ate all
his cheese.
Lets just say I wouldn't want to be a defendant with you guys as jurors.
Of course. We'll tell the truth. Truth to the religious is like garlic
to a vampire.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and in every age, the priest *
* has been hostile to liberty. He is always in *
* alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in *
* return for protection to his own." *
* --Jefferson (in a letter to H. Spafford, 1814) *
****************************************************
--
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rufi_Dukes" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
09 Mar 2006 07:09:39 PM |
|
|
Leif Erikson wrote:
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure
it. Newton had a theory of gravity; Einstein has a
somewhat different theory.
given that relativity has been demonstrated to be 100s of thousands
of times more accurate than newton, it is misleading (to say the least)
to describe it in such grossly understated terms as "a somewhat
different theory"
rufus
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
09 Mar 2006 10:24:47 PM |
|
|
"Rufi_Dukes" <rufi_dukes@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:1141952979.391444.167320@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
Leif Erikson wrote:
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure
it. Newton had a theory of gravity; Einstein has a
somewhat different theory.
given that relativity has been demonstrated to be 100s of thousands
of times more accurate than newton, it is misleading (to say the least)
to describe it in such grossly understated terms as "a somewhat
different theory"
Relativity is more accurate than Newton??
That's like saying philosophy has better manners than Kobe Bryant.
BAM
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eden" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
09 Mar 2006 10:41:57 PM |
|
|
Rufi_Dukes wrote:
Leif Erikson wrote:
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure
it. Newton had a theory of gravity; Einstein has a
somewhat different theory.
given that relativity has been demonstrated to be 100s of thousands
of times more accurate than newton, it is misleading (to say the least)
to describe it in such grossly understated terms as "a somewhat
different theory"
Newtonian physics predicts planetary motion and gravity
quite well.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
10 Mar 2006 09:38:55 AM |
|
|
Eden <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> writes:
Rufi_Dukes wrote:
Leif Erikson wrote:
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure
it. Newton had a theory of gravity; Einstein has a
somewhat different theory.
given that relativity has been demonstrated to be 100s of thousands
of times more accurate than newton, it is misleading (to say the least)
to describe it in such grossly understated terms as "a somewhat
different theory"
Newtonian physics predicts planetary motion and gravity
quite well.
And the precession of the orbit of Mercury?...
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rufi_Dukes" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
10 Mar 2006 07:58:06 PM |
|
|
Cary Kittrell wrote:
Eden <s.e.maizlisch@hertzburg.eduu> writes:
Rufi_Dukes wrote:
Leif Erikson wrote:
Gravity is an observable phenomenon. We can measure
it. Newton had a theory of gravity; Einstein has a
somewhat different theory.
given that relativity has been demonstrated to be 100s of thousands
of times more accurate than newton, it is misleading (to say the least)
to describe it in such grossly understated terms as "a somewhat
different theory"
Newtonian physics predicts planetary motion and gravity
quite well.
And the precession of the orbit of Mercury?...
-- cary
precisely, and this is only where the increased accuracy begins: what
about the degree of correspondence betw theory and experiment using
atomic clocks on board planes....all confirm einstein's theory to be
more accurate than newton's theory by severals orders of magnitude (i
read somewhere that it was 100s of thousands of times more accurate)
rufus
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Leif Erikson" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
08 Mar 2006 10:45:22 PM |
|
|
DanielSan wrote:
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof, there's
not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't believe
you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less true.
No, that's WRONG. What we call "gravity" is an
*observable* phenomenon - a FACT. There are theories
that attempt to explain gravity.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
08 Mar 2006 10:51:25 PM |
|
|
Leif Erikson wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof, there's
not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't believe
you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less true.
No, that's WRONG. What we call "gravity" is an *observable* phenomenon
- a FACT. There are theories that attempt to explain gravity.
Well, yes, but I was trying to dumb it down for bam. My apologies.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and in every age, the priest *
* has been hostile to liberty. He is always in *
* alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in *
* return for protection to his own." *
* --Jefferson (in a letter to H. Spafford, 1814) *
****************************************************
--
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
.
|
|
|
| User: "bam" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
09 Mar 2006 10:32:34 AM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb542$0$23930$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
Leif Erikson wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof, there's
not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't believe
you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less true.
No, that's WRONG. What we call "gravity" is an *observable* phenomenon -
a FACT. There are theories that attempt to explain gravity.
Well, yes, but I was trying to dumb it down for bam. My apologies.
....and the Lord scattereth mine enemies.
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll |
09 Mar 2006 08:27:46 PM |
|
|
bam wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:440fb542$0$23930$6d36acad@titian.nntpserver.com...
Leif Erikson wrote:
DanielSan wrote:
bam wrote:
"Leif Erikson" <pipes@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:TrMPf.1744$k75.905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
bam wrote:
"mel turner" <mturner@snipthis.acpub.duke.edu> wrote
This textbook would set out the tenets of evolution science with
proofs.
Science generally deals in "evidence", not "proofs" [apart from
strictly mathematical formulas]. Evolutionary science does have a
lot of both [hard evidence and theoretical math, the latter
especially with regard to population genetics theories].
Evidence is used to arrive at a proof. If there's no proof, there's
not enough evidence.
That's simply false. Scientific theories are not "proved".
At least you conced that Evolution is still a theory. I can't believe
you just gave me 90 yards.
Gravity is a theory, too, bam. But, it doesn't make it any less true.
No, that's WRONG. What we call "gravity" is an *observable* phenomenon -
a FACT. There are theories that attempt to explain gravity.
Well, yes, but I was trying to dumb it down for bam. My apologies.
...and the Lord scattereth mine enemies.
Non-sequitur.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and in every age, the priest *
* has been hostile to liberty. He is always in *
* alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in *
* return for protection to his own." *
* --Jefferson (in a letter to H. Spafford, 1814) *
****************************************************
--
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
