| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Harry Hope" |
| Date: |
06 Aug 2006 08:50:22 AM |
| Object: |
Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
From The Washington Post, 8/6/06:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/05/AR2006080500718.html?nav=rss_opinion
Nothing Wrong With Kansas
State voters move science education out of the Victorian era.
Sunday, August 6, 2006; Page B06
FOR THE SECOND time in less than a year, voters have turned out
office policymakers who insisted on teaching kids bad science.
Last year, the people of Dover, Pa., got rid of a group of school
board members who injected the theory of "intelligent design" into
high school biology.
Last week, Republican primary voters in Kansas ousted the conservative
majority on the state Board of Education, which had adopted science
standards embracing intelligent design and casting doubt on Darwinian
evolution.
Moderate Republicans replaced two conservatives -- giving those
supporting science at least a 6-to-4 majority, even if the other
conservatives hold on in the general election.
The vote, which should lead to changes to those embarrassing
standards, is an encouraging sign that even in conservative
jurisdictions, most people want kids to be taught biology, not
religion.
The Kansas board has been fighting over evolution since 1999, when it
moved to eliminate references to Darwinian theory from statewide
standards.
After anti-evolutionists lost their majority, the board restored
evolution's place.
But the conservatives regained the majority in 2004 and moved to
promote intelligent design -- a challenge to Darwinian theory based
not on biblical inerrancy or overt creationism but on purportedly
scientific flaws in the theory.
Its proponents claim that they merely intend to make sure that
schoolchildren get a full sense of the scientific controversy over
evolution.
The trouble with this liberal-seeming pose is that there is no
scientific controversy over whether evolution happens or over its
essential mechanisms.
Intelligent design is a defensible theological position -- the belief
that life is so complex and perfect that a creator must lie somewhere
behind it.
But being untestable in its positing of a supernatural explanation for
natural phenomena, it is no more scientific than the belief that
Athena was born from Zeus's head.
Teaching it as science does a grave disservice to students who wish to
understand natural phenomena that only evolution truly explains.
How do bacteria become drug-resistant?
Why do birds, bees and bats all have wings?
Intelligent design can lead only to unintelligent students, or at
least badly educated ones.
In the seesawing of Kansas politics on this issue, it is too early to
declare victory.
It is, however, encouraging that voters seem to be insisting, at least
for now, that when students study biology, they learn the real thing.
_____________________________________________________
"The argument that the literal story of Genesis can qualify as science
collapses on three major grounds: the creationists' need to invoke
miracles in order to compress the events of the earth's history into
the biblical span of a few thousand years; their unwillingness to
abandon claims clearly disproved, including the assertion that all
fossils are products of Noah's flood; and their reliance upon
distortion, misquote, half-quote, and citation out of context to
characterize the ideas of their opponents."
Stephen Jay Gould
Harry
.
|
|
| User: "Billy" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
11 Aug 2006 02:20:55 PM |
|
|
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dmn6nm3p4418e@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:ixtCg.51$y61.50@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dkn59rg4038c1@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
The "theory of gravity" and the "law of gravity" are two different
things. The "law", as described by Newton, is simply that all objects in
the universe attract each other with blah blah blah force, etc. The
"theory" is the description of how and why that works.
Similarly, the "law of evolution" could be stated as
Could be if there was such a thing as "the law of evolution"
There is. I stated it: "Populations of living organisms change over
time".
Write it down. Memorize it.
No such thing, sorry.
"populations of living
organisms change over time". The "theory" is merely the description of
why that is and how it happens. It's not a guess that evolution
happens - that is established and observed fact.
It is not a fact, it is the "best guess"
No, it's is observed fact.
A scientific theory is an explanation. The theory of how a disk drive
works is not a wild-assed guess about how this magical device works,
it's just a description of how it works.
There is no such thing as the "theory of disk drives" to my knowledge.
Key phrase: "to my knowledge". And given your display of knowledge, I'd
have to say I'm not surprised.
But yes, there is "theory" regarding almost everything. And in fact,
there are LOTS of "theories" about technologies involved in disk drives,
including Bernoulli's principle, metallurgy, magnetism, all sorts of
physics, etc. They key here is your misunderstanding of the term "theory",
and that's what people have been trying to tell you. You think of
"theory" as meaning "a guess about how things work", and there *is* such a
meaning to the word. But that's NOT the scientific meaning, and it's not
the meaning of the word when used in the term "Theory of Evolution".
You are the one that is confused with the term "theory" there is not a
"scientific theory" for almost everything. Certainly not a "theory of disk
drives". I'm sure the engineer who designed the disk drives applied many
scientific theories, including the theory of electricity, but you can not
assign laws and theories at your own whim. You are guilty of doing exactly
what you are accusing me of doing. I am giving laws and theories a lot more
creditability than you are. I just happen to know the difference between
Laws, and theories, I don't try to claim they are the same thing. I also
don't claim that theories are not presumed to be true, they are, but for
whatever reason they have not been proven. That doesn't mean we don't treat
them as true, Electricity is still a theory, perhaps when we can actually
see the electrons move through the conductor instead of just detect and
measure them, it will become a law.
It's as if you're arguing that a huge tank of water can't be a "tank"
because a "tank" has treads and a big gun on top. One word may have
several meanings, and you clearly don't understand the meaning of the word
"theory" when it comes to science.
Matter of fact, there is no single thing that is the "Theory of
Evolution", there is a lot of theory involved, as with disk drives or any
other complex concept. And all that theory needs to hang together. And
in the fields of biology, medicine, genetics, paleontology, etc. etc. etc
evolutionary theory DOES work together.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Agosta" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
10 Aug 2006 05:39:26 PM |
|
|
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:tGLCg.132$y61.57@fed1read05...
I am giving laws and theories a lot more
creditability than you are. I just happen to know the difference between
Laws, and theories, I don't try to claim they are the same thing. I also
don't claim that theories are not presumed to be true, they are, but for
whatever reason they have not been proven. That doesn't mean we don't
treat them as true, Electricity is still a theory, perhaps when we can
actually see the electrons move through the conductor instead of just
detect and measure them, it will become a law.
Next time you turn on a light, think nothing of Ohm's Law; everything you're
seeing is just theoretical.
Of course, you may not see anything at all - with your head in the sand the
way it is....
Good grief !!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Billy" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
11 Aug 2006 07:48:05 PM |
|
|
"John Agosta" <j_agosta@remove_wideopenwest.kom> wrote in message
news:T5SdnVZy_uo9KEbZnZ2dnUVZ_oCdnZ2d@wideopenwest.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:tGLCg.132$y61.57@fed1read05...
I am giving laws and theories a lot more
creditability than you are. I just happen to know the difference between
Laws, and theories, I don't try to claim they are the same thing. I also
don't claim that theories are not presumed to be true, they are, but for
whatever reason they have not been proven. That doesn't mean we don't
treat them as true, Electricity is still a theory, perhaps when we can
actually see the electrons move through the conductor instead of just
detect and measure them, it will become a law.
Next time you turn on a light, think nothing of Ohm's Law;
I hardly ever think of Ohm's Law when I turn on a light, I'm usually
thinking, its dark in here.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd King" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
11 Aug 2006 10:29:18 AM |
|
|
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:atQCg.160$y61.15@fed1read05...
"John Agosta" <j_agosta@remove_wideopenwest.kom> wrote in message
news:T5SdnVZy_uo9KEbZnZ2dnUVZ_oCdnZ2d@wideopenwest.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:tGLCg.132$y61.57@fed1read05...
I am giving laws and theories a lot more
creditability than you are. I just happen to know the difference between
Laws, and theories, I don't try to claim they are the same thing. I
also don't claim that theories are not presumed to be true, they are,
but for whatever reason they have not been proven. That doesn't mean we
don't treat them as true, Electricity is still a theory, perhaps when we
can actually see the electrons move through the conductor instead of
just detect and measure them, it will become a law.
Next time you turn on a light, think nothing of Ohm's Law;
I hardly ever think of Ohm's Law when I turn on a light, I'm usually
thinking, its dark in here.
How many Billys does it take to change a light bulb? None, apparently.
When he turns on a light, he's still thinking "it's dark in here."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd King" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
10 Aug 2006 02:51:50 PM |
|
|
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:tGLCg.132$y61.57@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dmn6nm3p4418e@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:ixtCg.51$y61.50@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dkn59rg4038c1@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
The "theory of gravity" and the "law of gravity" are two different
things. The "law", as described by Newton, is simply that all objects
in the universe attract each other with blah blah blah force, etc. The
"theory" is the description of how and why that works.
Similarly, the "law of evolution" could be stated as
Could be if there was such a thing as "the law of evolution"
There is. I stated it: "Populations of living organisms change over
time".
Write it down. Memorize it.
No such thing, sorry.
Yes there is. I just told it to you. Pay attention.
Do you deny the truth of the law? "Populations of living organisms change
over time".
A scientific theory is an explanation. The theory of how a disk drive
works is not a wild-assed guess about how this magical device works,
it's just a description of how it works.
There is no such thing as the "theory of disk drives" to my knowledge.
Key phrase: "to my knowledge". And given your display of knowledge, I'd
have to say I'm not surprised.
But yes, there is "theory" regarding almost everything. And in fact,
there are LOTS of "theories" about technologies involved in disk drives,
including Bernoulli's principle, metallurgy, magnetism, all sorts of
physics, etc. They key here is your misunderstanding of the term
"theory", and that's what people have been trying to tell you. You think
of "theory" as meaning "a guess about how things work", and there *is*
such a meaning to the word. But that's NOT the scientific meaning, and
it's not the meaning of the word when used in the term "Theory of
Evolution".
You are the one that is confused with the term "theory" there is not a
"scientific theory" for almost everything. Certainly not a "theory of disk
drives".
Yes, there is. You just plain old don't understand the word. In this
context, "theory" just means the explanation behind something - why it
works. There is theory for everything. And some of them are tenuous
because our understanding is weak, but in many cases, our understanding is
very strong and the theory behind something (say, how disk drives work) is
well understood and non-controversial.
I'm sure the engineer who designed the disk drives applied many
scientific theories, including the theory of electricity,
"THE theory of electricity?" LOL! What would that be?
but you can not assign laws and theories at your own whim.
Sure I can. Why can't I? Are you the theory police. I have a theory about
you...
You are guilty of doing exactly what you are accusing me of doing. I am
giving laws and theories a lot more creditability than you are. I just
happen to know the difference between Laws, and theories,
LOL! No you don't. You don't even know the meaning of the words.
I don't try to claim they are the same thing. I also don't claim that
theories are not presumed to be true, they are,
Not necessarily. You don't presume the theory of evolution to be true.
but for whatever reason they have not been proven.
See? You think a "law" is just a proven theory. But that's not true at
all. The law is the description of what happens - the law of gravity says
that things attract each other. That's Newton's law. And another "law" of
gravity says that things fall at a specific rate of acceleration. And
another says "what goes up must come down." And another describes the
strength of gravity at varios distances with various masses of things.
These are all desctiptions of facts. Like "2+2=4". They are not the
*theories* of *why* those things are true or *how* they work. There is
*mathematical theory* behind why 2+2=4, and why masses attract each other at
specific rates for specific distances. "Theory" is the explanation of the
"law".
That doesn't mean we don't treat them as true, Electricity is still a
theory,
Electricity is a theory? What kind of nonsensical statement is that? There
are many theories about electricity. Electrical theory, like mathematical
theory, is wide, deep and complex. There is no such thing as "THE" theory
of electricity.
perhaps when we can actually see the electrons move through the conductor
instead of just detect and measure them, it will become a law.
LOL!! See? Once again - you DO think theory and law are the same thing,
just with differing degrees of certainty. This is a fundamental
misunderstanding on your part, and it is at the root of your inability to
understand the nature of evolutionary theory.
It's as if you're arguing that a huge tank of water can't be a "tank"
because a "tank" has treads and a big gun on top. One word may have
several meanings, and you clearly don't understand the meaning of the
word "theory" when it comes to science.
Matter of fact, there is no single thing that is the "Theory of
Evolution", there is a lot of theory involved, as with disk drives or any
other complex concept. And all that theory needs to hang together. And
in the fields of biology, medicine, genetics, paleontology, etc. etc. etc
evolutionary theory DOES work together.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Billy" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
11 Aug 2006 03:31:34 PM |
|
|
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dn3inbbl74b4c@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:tGLCg.132$y61.57@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dmn6nm3p4418e@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:ixtCg.51$y61.50@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dkn59rg4038c1@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
The "theory of gravity" and the "law of gravity" are two different
things. The "law", as described by Newton, is simply that all objects
in the universe attract each other with blah blah blah force, etc.
The "theory" is the description of how and why that works.
Similarly, the "law of evolution" could be stated as
Could be if there was such a thing as "the law of evolution"
There is. I stated it: "Populations of living organisms change over
time".
Write it down. Memorize it.
No such thing, sorry.
Yes there is. I just told it to you. Pay attention.
Do you deny the truth of the law? "Populations of living organisms change
over time".
I deny that it is a law
A scientific theory is an explanation. The theory of how a disk drive
works is not a wild-assed guess about how this magical device works,
it's just a description of how it works.
There is no such thing as the "theory of disk drives" to my knowledge.
Key phrase: "to my knowledge". And given your display of knowledge,
I'd have to say I'm not surprised.
But yes, there is "theory" regarding almost everything. And in fact,
there are LOTS of "theories" about technologies involved in disk drives,
including Bernoulli's principle, metallurgy, magnetism, all sorts of
physics, etc. They key here is your misunderstanding of the term
"theory", and that's what people have been trying to tell you. You
think of "theory" as meaning "a guess about how things work", and there
*is* such a meaning to the word. But that's NOT the scientific meaning,
and it's not the meaning of the word when used in the term "Theory of
Evolution".
You are the one that is confused with the term "theory" there is not a
"scientific theory" for almost everything. Certainly not a "theory of
disk drives".
Yes, there is. You just plain old don't understand the word. In this
context, "theory" just means the explanation behind something - why it
works. There is theory for everything. And some of them are tenuous
because our understanding is weak, but in many cases, our understanding is
very strong and the theory behind something (say, how disk drives work) is
well understood and non-controversial.
I'm sure the engineer who designed the disk drives applied many
scientific theories, including the theory of electricity,
"THE theory of electricity?" LOL! What would that be?
The displacment of free electons in a conductor. That is real close, it has
been a couple of years.
but you can not assign laws and theories at your own whim.
Sure I can. Why can't I? Are you the theory police. I have a theory
about you...
Okay you can, but it doesn't mean *****. it is not a reconized theroy.
You are guilty of doing exactly what you are accusing me of doing. I am
giving laws and theories a lot more creditability than you are. I just
happen to know the difference between Laws, and theories,
LOL! No you don't. You don't even know the meaning of the words.
I have a good theroy
I don't try to claim they are the same thing. I also don't claim that
theories are not presumed to be true, they are,
Not necessarily. You don't presume the theory of evolution to be true.
I wasn't talking about me presuming them to be true I was talking about the
scientific community presuming them to be true.
but for whatever reason they have not been proven.
See? You think a "law" is just a proven theory. But that's not true at
all. The law is the description of what happens - the law of gravity says
that things attract each other. That's Newton's law. And another "law" of
gravity says that things fall at a specific rate of acceleration. And
another says "what goes up must come down." And another describes the
strength of gravity at varios distances with various masses of things.
These are all desctiptions of facts. Like "2+2=4". They are not the
*theories* of *why* those things are true or *how* they work. There is
*mathematical theory* behind why 2+2=4, and why masses attract each other
at specific rates for specific distances. "Theory" is the explanation of
the "law".
There is only one "law of gravity"every particle in the universe attracts
every other particle with a force that is directly proportional to the
product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the
distance between them"
That doesn't mean we don't treat them as true, Electricity is still a
theory,
Electricity is a theory? What kind of nonsensical statement is that?
There are many theories about electricity. Electrical theory, like
mathematical theory, is wide, deep and complex. There is no such thing as
"THE" theory of electricity.
Sorry you are so misinformed.
perhaps when we can actually see the electrons move through the conductor
instead of just detect and measure them, it will become a law.
LOL!! See? Once again - you DO think theory and law are the same thing,
just with differing degrees of certainty. This is a fundamental
misunderstanding on your part, and it is at the root of your inability to
understand the nature of evolutionary theory.
Well why don't you make up a law and change it. HAHAAH
It's as if you're arguing that a huge tank of water can't be a "tank"
because a "tank" has treads and a big gun on top. One word may have
several meanings, and you clearly don't understand the meaning of the
word "theory" when it comes to science.
Matter of fact, there is no single thing that is the "Theory of
Evolution", there is a lot of theory involved, as with disk drives or
any other complex concept. And all that theory needs to hang together.
And in the fields of biology, medicine, genetics, paleontology, etc.
etc. etc evolutionary theory DOES work together.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd King" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
10 Aug 2006 04:07:11 PM |
|
|
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:HIMCg.140$y61.19@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dn3inbbl74b4c@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:tGLCg.132$y61.57@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dmn6nm3p4418e@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:ixtCg.51$y61.50@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dkn59rg4038c1@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
The "theory of gravity" and the "law of gravity" are two different
things. The "law", as described by Newton, is simply that all objects
in the universe attract each other with blah blah blah force, etc.
The "theory" is the description of how and why that works.
Similarly, the "law of evolution" could be stated as
Could be if there was such a thing as "the law of evolution"
There is. I stated it: "Populations of living organisms change over
time".
Write it down. Memorize it.
No such thing, sorry.
Yes there is. I just told it to you. Pay attention.
Do you deny the truth of the law? "Populations of living organisms
change over time".
I deny that it is a law
So you're saying it's not true?
I'm sure the engineer who designed the disk drives applied many
scientific theories, including the theory of electricity,
"THE theory of electricity?" LOL! What would that be?
The displacment of free electons in a conductor. That is real close, it
has been a couple of years.
What? LOL! That's not even a sentence, much less a law. <chortle>
but you can not assign laws and theories at your own whim.
Sure I can. Why can't I? Are you the theory police. I have a theory
about you...
Okay you can, but it doesn't mean *****. it is not a reconized theroy.
But it IS the law.
You are guilty of doing exactly what you are accusing me of doing. I am
giving laws and theories a lot more creditability than you are. I just
happen to know the difference between Laws, and theories,
LOL! No you don't. You don't even know the meaning of the words.
I have a good theroy
You don't even have a good spell checker.
I don't try to claim they are the same thing. I also don't claim that
theories are not presumed to be true, they are,
Not necessarily. You don't presume the theory of evolution to be true.
I wasn't talking about me presuming them to be true I was talking about
the scientific community presuming them to be true.
And thus you provide us with yet another howling example of your almost
total lack of understanding of science.
That doesn't mean we don't treat them as true, Electricity is still a
theory,
Electricity is a theory? What kind of nonsensical statement is that?
There are many theories about electricity. Electrical theory, like
mathematical theory, is wide, deep and complex. There is no such thing
as "THE" theory of electricity.
Sorry you are so misinformed.
LOL! Okay, I'll play along. Quote the theory for me. And provide a cite
for somewhere that calims there is such a thing.
perhaps when we can actually see the electrons move through the
conductor instead of just detect and measure them, it will become a law.
LOL!! See? Once again - you DO think theory and law are the same thing,
just with differing degrees of certainty. This is a fundamental
misunderstanding on your part, and it is at the root of your inability to
understand the nature of evolutionary theory.
Well why don't you make up a law and change it. HAHAAH
??? Hello? <knock><knock><knock> Testing... testing... Is this thing
on?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Billy" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
11 Aug 2006 07:42:50 PM |
|
|
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dn800kd10fi53@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:HIMCg.140$y61.19@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dn3inbbl74b4c@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:tGLCg.132$y61.57@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dmn6nm3p4418e@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:ixtCg.51$y61.50@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dkn59rg4038c1@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
The "theory of gravity" and the "law of gravity" are two different
things. The "law", as described by Newton, is simply that all
objects in the universe attract each other with blah blah blah
force, etc. The "theory" is the description of how and why that
works.
Similarly, the "law of evolution" could be stated as
Could be if there was such a thing as "the law of evolution"
There is. I stated it: "Populations of living organisms change over
time".
Write it down. Memorize it.
No such thing, sorry.
Yes there is. I just told it to you. Pay attention.
Do you deny the truth of the law? "Populations of living organisms
change over time".
I deny that it is a law
So you're saying it's not true?
No, I'm saying it is not "the law of evolution"
I'm sure the engineer who designed the disk drives applied many
scientific theories, including the theory of electricity,
"THE theory of electricity?" LOL! What would that be?
The displacment of free electons in a conductor. That is real close, it
has been a couple of years.
What? LOL! That's not even a sentence, much less a law. <chortle>
Over your head.
but you can not assign laws and theories at your own whim.
Sure I can. Why can't I? Are you the theory police. I have a theory
about you...
Okay you can, but it doesn't mean *****. it is not a reconized theroy.
But it IS the law.
You are guilty of doing exactly what you are accusing me of doing. I am
giving laws and theories a lot more creditability than you are. I just
happen to know the difference between Laws, and theories,
LOL! No you don't. You don't even know the meaning of the words.
I have a good theroy
You don't even have a good spell checker.
I don't try to claim they are the same thing. I also don't claim that
theories are not presumed to be true, they are,
Not necessarily. You don't presume the theory of evolution to be true.
I wasn't talking about me presuming them to be true I was talking about
the scientific community presuming them to be true.
And thus you provide us with yet another howling example of your almost
total lack of understanding of science.
That doesn't mean we don't treat them as true, Electricity is still a
theory,
Electricity is a theory? What kind of nonsensical statement is that?
There are many theories about electricity. Electrical theory, like
mathematical theory, is wide, deep and complex. There is no such thing
as "THE" theory of electricity.
Sorry you are so misinformed.
LOL! Okay, I'll play along. Quote the theory for me. And provide a cite
for somewhere that calims there is such a thing.
Okay, right after you quote the theory of disk drives. And Provide a cite
for somewhere that claims there is such a thing.
perhaps when we can actually see the electrons move through the
conductor instead of just detect and measure them, it will become a
law.
LOL!! See? Once again - you DO think theory and law are the same
thing, just with differing degrees of certainty. This is a fundamental
misunderstanding on your part, and it is at the root of your inability
to understand the nature of evolutionary theory.
Well why don't you make up a law and change it. HAHAAH
??? Hello? <knock><knock><knock> Testing... testing... Is this
thing on?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd King" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
11 Aug 2006 10:27:55 AM |
|
|
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:joQCg.158$y61.102@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dn800kd10fi53@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:HIMCg.140$y61.19@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dn3inbbl74b4c@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:tGLCg.132$y61.57@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dmn6nm3p4418e@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:ixtCg.51$y61.50@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dkn59rg4038c1@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
The "theory of gravity" and the "law of gravity" are two different
things. The "law", as described by Newton, is simply that all
objects in the universe attract each other with blah blah blah
force, etc. The "theory" is the description of how and why that
works.
Similarly, the "law of evolution" could be stated as
Could be if there was such a thing as "the law of evolution"
There is. I stated it: "Populations of living organisms change over
time".
Write it down. Memorize it.
No such thing, sorry.
Yes there is. I just told it to you. Pay attention.
Do you deny the truth of the law? "Populations of living organisms
change over time".
I deny that it is a law
So you're saying it's not true?
No, I'm saying it is not "the law of evolution"
Sure it is. It's the Truth. That is the Law.
I'm sure the engineer who designed the disk drives applied many
scientific theories, including the theory of electricity,
"THE theory of electricity?" LOL! What would that be?
The displacment of free electons in a conductor. That is real close, it
has been a couple of years.
What? LOL! That's not even a sentence, much less a law. <chortle>
Over your head.
That's not a sentence either.
That doesn't mean we don't treat them as true, Electricity is still a
theory,
Electricity is a theory? What kind of nonsensical statement is that?
There are many theories about electricity. Electrical theory, like
mathematical theory, is wide, deep and complex. There is no such thing
as "THE" theory of electricity.
Sorry you are so misinformed.
LOL! Okay, I'll play along. Quote the theory for me. And provide a
cite for somewhere that calims there is such a thing.
Okay, right after you quote the theory of disk drives. And Provide a cite
for somewhere that claims there is such a thing.
LOL! You *really* don't get this whole "theory" thing, do you. You still
insist on continuing with this "THE" theory of X. There is not "A" theory
of any of these things. The "theory" behind them is a lot of complex,
inter-related explanations of how the whole thing works. Electricity
isn't a "theory" - it is what it is. There are various facts about
electricity, and it is a physical phenomenon. It simply *is*. And any
consistent behavior of electricity can be described as "laws of
electricity", waiting to be discovered and described. The "theory" part is
the description of how and why electricity is as it is. And there is a LOT
of theory involved wih electricity. That it exists is no more "theoretical"
than the fact that evolution exists, or that gravity exists.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
12 Aug 2006 10:41:37 PM |
|
|
Billy wrote:
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dmn6nm3p4418e@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:ixtCg.51$y61.50@fed1read05...
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dkn59rg4038c1@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
The "theory of gravity" and the "law of gravity" are two different
things. The "law", as described by Newton, is simply that all objects in
the universe attract each other with blah blah blah force, etc. The
"theory" is the description of how and why that works.
Similarly, the "law of evolution" could be stated as
Could be if there was such a thing as "the law of evolution"
There is. I stated it: "Populations of living organisms change over
time".
Write it down. Memorize it.
No such thing, sorry.
Yes, there is, you've admitted it "microevolution".
"populations of living
organisms change over time". The "theory" is merely the description of
why that is and how it happens. It's not a guess that evolution
happens - that is established and observed fact.
It is not a fact, it is the "best guess"
No, it's is observed fact.
A scientific theory is an explanation. The theory of how a disk drive
works is not a wild-assed guess about how this magical device works,
it's just a description of how it works.
There is no such thing as the "theory of disk drives" to my knowledge.
Key phrase: "to my knowledge". And given your display of knowledge, I'd
have to say I'm not surprised.
But yes, there is "theory" regarding almost everything. And in fact,
there are LOTS of "theories" about technologies involved in disk drives,
including Bernoulli's principle, metallurgy, magnetism, all sorts of
physics, etc. They key here is your misunderstanding of the term "theory",
and that's what people have been trying to tell you. You think of
"theory" as meaning "a guess about how things work", and there *is* such a
meaning to the word. But that's NOT the scientific meaning, and it's not
the meaning of the word when used in the term "Theory of Evolution".
You are the one that is confused with the term "theory" there is not a
"scientific theory" for almost everything. Certainly not a "theory of disk
drives". I'm sure the engineer who designed the disk drives applied many
scientific theories, including the theory of electricity, but you can not
assign laws and theories at your own whim. You are guilty of doing exactly
what you are accusing me of doing. I am giving laws and theories a lot more
creditability than you are. I just happen to know the difference between
Laws, and theories, I don't try to claim they are the same thing. I also
don't claim that theories are not presumed to be true, they are, but for
whatever reason they have not been proven. That doesn't mean we don't treat
them as true, Electricity is still a theory, perhaps when we can actually
see the electrons move through the conductor instead of just detect and
measure them, it will become a law.
It's as if you're arguing that a huge tank of water can't be a "tank"
because a "tank" has treads and a big gun on top. One word may have
several meanings, and you clearly don't understand the meaning of the word
"theory" when it comes to science.
Matter of fact, there is no single thing that is the "Theory of
Evolution", there is a lot of theory involved, as with disk drives or any
other complex concept. And all that theory needs to hang together. And
in the fields of biology, medicine, genetics, paleontology, etc. etc. etc
evolutionary theory DOES work together.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Lee Elifritz" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
10 Aug 2006 07:44:44 PM |
|
|
Billy wrote:
Electricity is still a theory, perhaps when we can actually
see the electrons move through the conductor instead of just detect and
measure them, it will become a law.
I guess that makes you a virtual dumbfuck.
http://cosmic.lifeform.org
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
09 Aug 2006 11:06:37 PM |
|
|
Billy wrote:
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dkn59rg4038c1@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:SXoCg.21$rT5.10@fed1read01...
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155143345.358928.275160@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155141973.043649.91720@n13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
[snip]
No you think a cat evolving into a different cat enough times will
make a
dog.
[snip]
I don't know of a single scientific theory that professes to
predict such
a phenomenon. By the time enough incremental changes had taken
effect
to make such a large change, neither dogs nor cats would probably
exist.
But then who knows, it's only a theroy, afterall.
Which is a bit like saying it's "only" a thermonuclear bomb.
A theory is a fairly high standard of accomplishment.
No, you can prove it is a thermonuclear bomb. A scientific Theory is
accepted as the truth, A scientific Law is the truth. You don't see many
people debating the law of gravity, do ya. A few drunk ones trying to
disprove it maybe.
The "theory of gravity" and the "law of gravity" are two different things.
The "law", as described by Newton, is simply that all objects in the
universe attract each other with blah blah blah force, etc. The "theory"
is the description of how and why that works.
Similarly, the "law of evolution" could be stated as
Could be if there was such a thing as "the law of evolution"
Actually there is. It's called genetics.
"populations of living
organisms change over time". The "theory" is merely the description of
why that is and how it happens. It's not a guess that evolution happens -
that is established and observed fact.
It is not a fact, it is the "best guess"
A scientific theory is an explanation. The theory of how a disk drive
works is not a wild-assed guess about how this magical device works, it's
just a description of how it works.
There is no such thing as the "theory of disk drives" to my knowledge.
You are *seriously* in need of education on this stuff. But then, there
are a lot of people like you.
People like you seem to be in a need as well.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Billy" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
10 Aug 2006 10:13:49 AM |
|
|
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:44DAB0CD.6F396E71@hotmMOVEail.com...
Billy wrote:
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dkn59rg4038c1@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:SXoCg.21$rT5.10@fed1read01...
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155143345.358928.275160@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155141973.043649.91720@n13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
[snip]
No you think a cat evolving into a different cat enough times
will
make a
dog.
[snip]
I don't know of a single scientific theory that professes to
predict such
a phenomenon. By the time enough incremental changes had taken
effect
to make such a large change, neither dogs nor cats would probably
exist.
But then who knows, it's only a theroy, afterall.
Which is a bit like saying it's "only" a thermonuclear bomb.
A theory is a fairly high standard of accomplishment.
No, you can prove it is a thermonuclear bomb. A scientific Theory is
accepted as the truth, A scientific Law is the truth. You don't see
many
people debating the law of gravity, do ya. A few drunk ones trying to
disprove it maybe.
The "theory of gravity" and the "law of gravity" are two different
things.
The "law", as described by Newton, is simply that all objects in the
universe attract each other with blah blah blah force, etc. The
"theory"
is the description of how and why that works.
Similarly, the "law of evolution" could be stated as
Could be if there was such a thing as "the law of evolution"
Actually there is. It's called genetics.
Oh, that is a good one, will you be here all week?
"populations of living
organisms change over time". The "theory" is merely the description of
why that is and how it happens. It's not a guess that evolution
happens -
that is established and observed fact.
It is not a fact, it is the "best guess"
A scientific theory is an explanation. The theory of how a disk drive
works is not a wild-assed guess about how this magical device works,
it's
just a description of how it works.
There is no such thing as the "theory of disk drives" to my knowledge.
You are *seriously* in need of education on this stuff. But then,
there
are a lot of people like you.
People like you seem to be in a need as well.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
12 Aug 2006 10:15:18 PM |
|
|
Billy wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:44DAB0CD.6F396E71@hotmMOVEail.com...
Billy wrote:
"Lloyd King" <lloydking@kinglloydcom.com> wrote in message
news:12dkn59rg4038c1@corp.supernews.com...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:SXoCg.21$rT5.10@fed1read01...
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155143345.358928.275160@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155141973.043649.91720@n13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
[snip]
No you think a cat evolving into a different cat enough times
will
make a
dog.
[snip]
I don't know of a single scientific theory that professes to
predict such
a phenomenon. By the time enough incremental changes had taken
effect
to make such a large change, neither dogs nor cats would probably
exist.
But then who knows, it's only a theroy, afterall.
Which is a bit like saying it's "only" a thermonuclear bomb.
A theory is a fairly high standard of accomplishment.
No, you can prove it is a thermonuclear bomb. A scientific Theory is
accepted as the truth, A scientific Law is the truth. You don't see
many
people debating the law of gravity, do ya. A few drunk ones trying to
disprove it maybe.
The "theory of gravity" and the "law of gravity" are two different
things.
The "law", as described by Newton, is simply that all objects in the
universe attract each other with blah blah blah force, etc. The
"theory"
is the description of how and why that works.
Similarly, the "law of evolution" could be stated as
Could be if there was such a thing as "the law of evolution"
Actually there is. It's called genetics.
Oh, that is a good one, will you be here all week?
THAT'S a good one! Will YOU be here all week?
"populations of living
organisms change over time". The "theory" is merely the description of
why that is and how it happens. It's not a guess that evolution
happens -
that is established and observed fact.
It is not a fact, it is the "best guess"
A scientific theory is an explanation. The theory of how a disk drive
works is not a wild-assed guess about how this magical device works,
it's
just a description of how it works.
There is no such thing as the "theory of disk drives" to my knowledge.
You are *seriously* in need of education on this stuff. But then,
there
are a lot of people like you.
People like you seem to be in a need as well.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
09 Aug 2006 11:05:51 PM |
|
|
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155143345.358928.275160@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155141973.043649.91720@n13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
[snip]
No you think a cat evolving into a different cat enough times will
make a
dog.
[snip]
I don't know of a single scientific theory that professes to predict
such
a phenomenon. By the time enough incremental changes had taken effect
to make such a large change, neither dogs nor cats would probably
exist.
But then who knows, it's only a theroy, afterall.
Which is a bit like saying it's "only" a thermonuclear bomb.
A theory is a fairly high standard of accomplishment.
No, you can prove it is a thermonuclear bomb. A scientific Theory is
accepted as the truth, A scientific Law is the truth. You don't see many
people debating the law of gravity, do ya. A few drunk ones trying to
disprove it maybe.
Actually, there's a lot of debate about gravity. No one has been able to
explain it yet or observe gravity waves.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Billy" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
10 Aug 2006 10:14:21 AM |
|
|
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:44DAB09F.12E7F849@hotmMOVEail.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155143345.358928.275160@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155141973.043649.91720@n13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
[snip]
No you think a cat evolving into a different cat enough times will
make a
dog.
[snip]
I don't know of a single scientific theory that professes to
predict
such
a phenomenon. By the time enough incremental changes had taken
effect
to make such a large change, neither dogs nor cats would probably
exist.
But then who knows, it's only a theroy, afterall.
Which is a bit like saying it's "only" a thermonuclear bomb.
A theory is a fairly high standard of accomplishment.
No, you can prove it is a thermonuclear bomb. A scientific Theory is
accepted as the truth, A scientific Law is the truth. You don't see many
people debating the law of gravity, do ya. A few drunk ones trying to
disprove it maybe.
Actually, there's a lot of debate about gravity. No one has been able to
explain it yet or observe gravity waves.
cite?
.
|
|
|
| User: "*_Host_*" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
11 Aug 2006 12:21:44 AM |
|
|
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:h3ICg.91$y61.80@fed1read05...
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:44DAB09F.12E7F849@hotmMOVEail.com...
Actually, there's a lot of debate about gravity. No one has been able to
explain it yet or observe gravity waves.
cite?
Gravity propulsion would be great.
I would not be surprised if there are people doing it somehow now.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Billy" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
12 Aug 2006 10:07:47 AM |
|
|
"*_Host_*" <host@home.com> wrote in message
news:712ee$44dc1327$4088c253$6517@EVERESTKC.NET...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:h3ICg.91$y61.80@fed1read05...
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:44DAB09F.12E7F849@hotmMOVEail.com...
Actually, there's a lot of debate about gravity. No one has been able
to
explain it yet or observe gravity waves.
cite?
Gravity propulsion would be great.
I would not be surprised if there are people doing it somehow now.
Going down hill?
.
|
|
|
| User: "*_Host_*" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
12 Aug 2006 01:01:49 PM |
|
|
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:831Dg.176$rT5.133@fed1read01...
"*_Host_*" <host@home.com> wrote in message
news:712ee$44dc1327$4088c253$6517@EVERESTKC.NET...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:h3ICg.91$y61.80@fed1read05...
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:44DAB09F.12E7F849@hotmMOVEail.com...
Actually, there's a lot of debate about gravity. No one has been able
to
explain it yet or observe gravity waves.
cite?
Gravity propulsion would be great.
I would not be surprised if there are people doing it somehow now.
Going down hill?
Exactly.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd King" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
11 Aug 2006 10:29:58 AM |
|
|
"*_Host_*" <host@home.com> wrote in message
news:712ee$44dc1327$4088c253$6517@EVERESTKC.NET...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:h3ICg.91$y61.80@fed1read05...
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:44DAB09F.12E7F849@hotmMOVEail.com...
Actually, there's a lot of debate about gravity. No one has been able
to
explain it yet or observe gravity waves.
cite?
Gravity propulsion would be great.
I would not be surprised if there are people doing it somehow now.
I do it all the time. The only problem is: it only works in one direction.
But it's REAL reliable.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd King" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
10 Aug 2006 11:21:39 AM |
|
|
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:h3ICg.91$y61.80@fed1read05...
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:44DAB09F.12E7F849@hotmMOVEail.com...
Billy wrote:
But then who knows, it's only a theroy, afterall.
Which is a bit like saying it's "only" a thermonuclear bomb.
A theory is a fairly high standard of accomplishment.
No, you can prove it is a thermonuclear bomb. A scientific Theory is
accepted as the truth, A scientific Law is the truth. You don't see
many
people debating the law of gravity, do ya. A few drunk ones trying to
disprove it maybe.
Actually, there's a lot of debate about gravity. No one has been able to
explain it yet or observe gravity waves.
cite?
ROTFL!!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
12 Aug 2006 10:24:33 PM |
|
|
Billy wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:44DAB09F.12E7F849@hotmMOVEail.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155143345.358928.275160@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155141973.043649.91720@n13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
[snip]
No you think a cat evolving into a different cat enough times will
make a
dog.
[snip]
I don't know of a single scientific theory that professes to
predict
such
a phenomenon. By the time enough incremental changes had taken
effect
to make such a large change, neither dogs nor cats would probably
exist.
But then who knows, it's only a theroy, afterall.
Which is a bit like saying it's "only" a thermonuclear bomb.
A theory is a fairly high standard of accomplishment.
No, you can prove it is a thermonuclear bomb. A scientific Theory is
accepted as the truth, A scientific Law is the truth. You don't see many
people debating the law of gravity, do ya. A few drunk ones trying to
disprove it maybe.
Actually, there's a lot of debate about gravity. No one has been able to
explain it yet or observe gravity waves.
cite?
http://science.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1183540.php/German_scientists_switch_on_gravity-wave_device_to_seek_dark_matter
Hamburg - In one of astronomy's most unusual experiments, scientists in Germany
have switched on a device which they hope will enable them to detect gravity
waves - and possibly learn the composition of 'dark matter' in space.
The instrument in Hanover will run continuously for 18 months in the hope of
finally capturing the essence of a gravitational wave - a ripple or a distortion
in that relativistic entity known as 'space- time' as first predicted by Albert
Einstein when he formulated his general theory of relativity in 1916.
So far, no one has actually detected any gravity waves. That is what the German
scientists hope to do with their Gravitational Wave Detector, called the GEO600.
...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Billy" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
14 Aug 2006 10:20:45 AM |
|
|
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:44DE9B71.3D193A14@hotmMOVEail.com...
Billy wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:44DAB09F.12E7F849@hotmMOVEail.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155143345.358928.275160@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155141973.043649.91720@n13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
[snip]
No you think a cat evolving into a different cat enough times
will
make a
dog.
[snip]
I don't know of a single scientific theory that professes to
predict
such
a phenomenon. By the time enough incremental changes had taken
effect
to make such a large change, neither dogs nor cats would probably
exist.
But then who knows, it's only a theroy, afterall.
Which is a bit like saying it's "only" a thermonuclear bomb.
A theory is a fairly high standard of accomplishment.
No, you can prove it is a thermonuclear bomb. A scientific Theory is
accepted as the truth, A scientific Law is the truth. You don't see
many
people debating the law of gravity, do ya. A few drunk ones trying to
disprove it maybe.
Actually, there's a lot of debate about gravity. No one has been able
to
explain it yet or observe gravity waves.
cite?
http://science.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1183540.php/German_scientists_switch_on_gravity-wave_device_to_seek_dark_matter
Hamburg - In one of astronomy's most unusual experiments, scientists in
Germany
have switched on a device which they hope will enable them to detect
gravity
waves - and possibly learn the composition of 'dark matter' in space.
The instrument in Hanover will run continuously for 18 months in the hope
of
finally capturing the essence of a gravitational wave - a ripple or a
distortion
in that relativistic entity known as 'space- time' as first predicted by
Albert
Einstein when he formulated his general theory of relativity in 1916.
So far, no one has actually detected any gravity waves. That is what the
German
scientists hope to do with their Gravitational Wave Detector, called the
GEO600.
Fair enough,
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
09 Aug 2006 12:45:20 PM |
|
|
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155143345.358928.275160@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
[snip]
But then who knows, it's only a theroy, afterall.
Which is a bit like saying it's "only" a thermonuclear bomb.
A theory is a fairly high standard of accomplishment.
No, you can prove it is a thermonuclear bomb. A scientific Theory is
accepted as the truth, A scientific Law is the truth.
Nah. There's no functional difference between the theory of
gravity and the law of gravity. The law of conservation of mass
was found to be "wrong" once and modified (now called the
conservation of mass and energy).
You don't see many
people debating the law of gravity, do ya. A few drunk ones trying to
disprove it maybe.
Actually, one big reason for the investigations into the TOE
is that the law of gravity doesn't apply in so many instances.
Furthermore, there is still a significant amount of research into
how gravity works, and regularly involves testing to ensure in some
new context that the theory (law) is still accurate.
The various theories involved in the process of evolution are no
different than the various theories of gravity. They all explain
a large number of observations and have predictive value.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Billy" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
09 Aug 2006 01:55:59 PM |
|
|
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155145519.964073.94780@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155143345.358928.275160@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
[snip]
But then who knows, it's only a theroy, afterall.
Which is a bit like saying it's "only" a thermonuclear bomb.
A theory is a fairly high standard of accomplishment.
No, you can prove it is a thermonuclear bomb. A scientific Theory is
accepted as the truth, A scientific Law is the truth.
Nah. There's no functional difference between the theory of
gravity and the law of gravity. The law of conservation of mass
was found to be "wrong" once and modified (now called the
conservation of mass and energy).
You don't see many
people debating the law of gravity, do ya. A few drunk ones trying to
disprove it maybe.
Actually, one big reason for the investigations into the TOE
is that the law of gravity doesn't apply in so many instances.
Furthermore, there is still a significant amount of research into
how gravity works, and regularly involves testing to ensure in some
new context that the theory (law) is still accurate.
The various theories involved in the process of evolution are no
different than the various theories of gravity. They all explain
a large number of observations and have predictive value.
Correction it is "The law of gravity" and "The theroy of evloution" it is
"The hypothetical Theroy of Everything" Look it up.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
09 Aug 2006 02:03:41 PM |
|
|
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155145519.964073.94780@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
[snip]
The various theories involved in the process of evolution are no
different than the various theories of gravity. They all explain
a large number of observations and have predictive value.
Correction it is "The law of gravity" and "The theroy of evloution" it is
"The hypothetical Theroy of Everything" Look it up.
As I said, there is no functional difference between a theory
and a "law". They are just two expressions for the same thing.
"Laws" tend to be older in origin, and more universal in application,
but I'd bet that no more "laws" will be created as the very
expression is a bit absurd. And I did "look it up" and it was
called the Theory of Everything which it equated to the
Grand Unified Field Theorem.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Billy" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
09 Aug 2006 02:16:48 PM |
|
|
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155150220.941969.315640@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155145519.964073.94780@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
[snip]
The various theories involved in the process of evolution are no
different than the various theories of gravity. They all explain
a large number of observations and have predictive value.
Correction it is "The law of gravity" and "The theroy of evloution" it is
"The hypothetical Theroy of Everything" Look it up.
As I said, there is no functional difference between a theory
and a "law". They are just two expressions for the same thing.
"Laws" tend to be older in origin, and more universal in application,
but I'd bet that no more "laws" will be created as the very
expression is a bit absurd. And I did "look it up" and it was
called the Theory of Everything which it equated to the
Grand Unified Field Theorem.
Go with that then
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd King" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
09 Aug 2006 05:09:26 PM |
|
|
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:zwqCg.16$y61.0@fed1read05...
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155150220.941969.315640@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
Billy wrote:
<oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com> wrote in message
news:1155145519.964073.94780@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
[snip]
The various theories involved in the process of evolution are no
different than the various theories of gravity. They all explain
a large number of observations and have predictive value.
Correction it is "The law of gravity" and "The theroy of evloution" it
is
"The hypothetical Theroy of Everything" Look it up.
As I said, there is no functional difference between a theory
and a "law". They are just two expressions for the same thing.
"Laws" tend to be older in origin, and more universal in application,
but I'd bet that no more "laws" will be created as the very
expression is a bit absurd. And I did "look it up" and it was
called the Theory of Everything which it equated to the
Grand Unified Field Theorem.
Go with that then
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p67.htm
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky" |
|
| Title: Re: Nothing Wrong With Kansas |
09 Aug 2006 11:01:26 PM |
|
|
Billy wrote:
"monkeyhawk" <monkeyhawk@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Km7Cg.79463$fG3.10953@dukeread09...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in message
news:876Cg.110495$iU2.15186@fed1read01...
"monkeyhawk" <monkeyhawk@cox.net> wrote in message
news:JP5Cg.79449$fG3.54401@dukeread09...
"Billy" <nevermind@cox.net> wrote in
"monkeyhawk" <monkeyhawk@cox.net> wrote in message
news:A43Cg.79434$fG3.60207@dukeread09...
Okay, "Billy," try to wrap your little brain around this little
example:
Most mammals can synthesize vitamin C, and they use the same set of
genes to do it. Evolution and common descent allow us to predict that,
while humans are known not to produce vitamin C (you've heard of
scurvy, right?) humans ought to still have the genes in some
non-functional form. And given that we know what genes are close to
the vitamin C genes in other mammals, we know where it ought to be.
And that's where we find the non-functional vitamin C genes in humans.
We can then make some predictions. We know that the primates in
general share a lot of adaptations to frugivory (eating fruit). Color
vision, tree-climbing, etc. all help locate and get to ripe fruit in
primates from Africa to the Pacific and the Americas. Fruit is high in
vitamin C (again, consider scurvy). Frugivorous species that can't
synthesize vitamin C will be unharmed, and since it's possible to OD
on vitamin C, might even be better off. This would suggest that humans
shouldn't be the only primates who can't synthesize vitamin C.
When we test that prediction, we find that many primates also have a
defective gene. The same gene is there, and it is non-functional
because of similar mutations. Lemurs and tarsiers, groups that are
considered less closely related to humans and other apes for
independent reasons, have an active vitamin C gene. Old World monkeys,
New World monkeys, gibbons and apes all lack a functional vitamin C
gene. This all is consistent with predictions you'd make from common
descent. That's science. It isn't that God couldn't have done the same
thing, it's that you couldn't predict that this set of phenomena would
happen based on creationism. It isn't science.
Evolution is based on a set of hypotheses about the natural world. We
can test these hypotheses. If we find that the hypotheses produce
bogus predictions, we have to get new hypotheses. That's science. | |
