{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
3/10/2015 3:16:28 AM
57
The fossil record is not adequate evidence and that's pretty much the only thing in the way of proof the theory has to back it up. Its called skepticism and its the only way we ever really find out if something is true or not especially when it comes to deductive arguments.
Anybody that puts their blind faith into a theory without looking at the evidence thus conforming to scientific orthodox deserves a Darwin Award.
English
-
Defuq do you get your facts from? We have found dinosaurs. Do you think they just kinda DIED IN SOME RANDOM EXPLOSION CAUSED WHEN ONE T REX TRIED TO BONE A MIDGET FLAVORED BIRD and then humans was alls like "oh hey, I exist too!"? No they evolved to suit they're needs in the food chain. Their prey got smaller to run away faster so they got smaller to run away faster. Simple logic. And btw long term adaptation=evolution.
-
This is an example of how not to argument.
-
You said the word "proof" You do not know what science truly does There is also an incredible amount of evidence supporting evolution besides the stupid fossil record
-
You're a hypocrite, because you are disproving a theory even though you haven't seen all the evidence.
-
No, there are observations of natural selection that show exactly how evolution happens, and the fossil records show that same process over a much longer time span.
-
>not realizing what a theory really is
-
> not realizing that all theories need to be judged based on the evidence presented for them and are supposed to be challenged in order to further the understanding of specific statements the theory makes so we can further solidify, adapt, or disprove the main concept.
-
Edited by Assassin 11D7: 3/18/2015 5:18:30 AM>not realizing a theory has to have sufficient evidence to be called a theory in the scientific community and not any idea gets called a theory. You've got a better claim, test it, find evidence, and present it. See how well it does compared to Evolution.
-
I don't have a better claim but it is foolish to just accept things and the evidence found in favor of the theory is not a direct cause of all the claims and they are effects of what was presumed to be the cause when in fact different causes can have the same effect.
-
So, you don't have a better claim, but you're rejecting the best theory we have because.....? Guess what, it has the best support of any claim so far and it's got no real contestants. It might get debunked or something might have to be changed about it, but until then we support it and test it to see how well it holds up, and it holds up better than anything else, so we go with it.
-
I'm not outright rejecting I am staying skeptical. If people are not skeptical then the theory will never be challenged and never be improved to find out what really happened. People should not just outright say that" this theory is a fact and people who don't 100% believe in it are morons" because this theory even being one of the more sustainable ones is not conclusive.
-
THE THEORY HAS AND IS STILL CHALLENGED. Holy crap, do you think once Darwin wrote it down and dug up some rocks they just went, "Shit we solved it, pack it up we're done here for all eternity"? Nobody is saying believe it 100%, I'm telling you it's the best we have so believing it now is smart because there is no contesting theory, but believing something doesn't mean giving it your all. If it's not the best, then what is? You claim things and do not back them up, how researched in the subject even are you? You say the fossil record is all the theory has for support, have you learned how that's wrong yet? Research it before saying things like this.
-
According to Dawkins yes it's chalked up and to believe otherwise is stupidity
-
Or I can wait until the evidence is conclusive before choosing to believe it. I've also made no claims and have no need to back up what I did not make.
-
[quote]The fossil record is not adequate evidence and that's pretty much the only thing in the way of proof the theory has to back it up. [/quote] Gee, glad that's not a claim.
-
Even if the fossil record didn't exist, evolution is still an observed fact with mountains of evidence backing it up.
-
None of that evidence is a definitive link to the theory. I'm not saying that it is a bad theory what I am saying is that evidence is not irrefutable and unless something is irrefutable then we should all be skeptical so that we find out what really happened. Science is meant to be challenged. Not accepted.
-
Evolution was derived directly from observation. There is no arbitrary conjecture, it is exactly what you see in nature. There is no fairy wand waving involved, all parts of the theory have basis in observed evidence.
-
The observations are irrefutable
-
So there's monkeymen gallivanting around to observe I'd love to see one I could use one to go get my beer
-
There are no observations of the actual process. There are observations about what is assumed to be adaptations but that key word is assumed.
-
Viruses and diseases are the easiest way to see evolution with your own eyes in your own lifetime.
-
This would explain humanity. We evolved from diseases and viruses.
-
Yes there are, have you heard of a ring species?
-
I have and that only proves that species can adapt. If that were the extent of the Theory of Evolution then I would gladly accept it as fact but the theory tackles many other aspects and makes many assumptions in the process.
