{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
5/10/2015 1:57:43 PM
22
A. Gravity is a law, not a theory.
B. Microevolution has been observed in nature, time and time again.
C. There are at least 5, possibly more depending on who you are debating with, other types of evolution, including macroevolution which are still scientifically seen as hypotheses since they have never been seen occur in laboratory or field conditions.
D. Science is not something to be handled by someone in an emotional state. It just becomes spittle and drivel coming out of an uninformed mouth. This is not meant to be offensive, it's an observation I have made as a scientist where when someone wants to fight so hard for a point that they ignore the empirical data and/or their own limits.
Have a nice day everyone!
English
-
I was referring to the actual scientific term. I don't know who you are referring to but I don't mix faith and science, as an atheist. I just know that there's an answer and we aren't privy to all of its intricacies at our level. The definition I know as macroevolution talks about huge jumps in taxonomy. I copy pasted this because it was as close to what I understand it to be, as a geologist. "major evolutionary change. The term applies mainly to the evolution of whole taxonomic groups over long periods of time." Take it with a grain of salt. Thanks for all the replies fellas. Keep it classy^^
-
For part C, if you are referring to Kent hovind's forms of evolution, all of those are created by Kent, a creationist, to discredit evolution as a whole. None of those are actual accepted forms of biological evolution. macro and micro are both biological evolution itself! They are the same process.
-
Wow, um so this got out of hand fast. Hard to address all this but see "D" of my 1st post. Everyone got very emotional. I'm only speaking from experience as a geologist for Shell, I have seen mile long core samples and these are why I doubt all the suppositions they teach young people. One of the greatest tenants of the theory of evolution is that the geologic column supports period fossils, this is all a lie. The sad truth is, while digging all over the world we find things that shouldn't be, dare I say "can't" be together. Namely dinosaur remains with human remains in close proximity and in the same sedimentary layer. Now, honestly, we are told that this isn't our job if we say something about "scientific discovery" and that's the truth. We are there to help facilitate extraction in the safest possible way, period. Other examples of things we found, if you are curious are trees, that obviously we're alive when they were buried in layers of sediment. This in general is not a problem but these trees will cross layers of sediment that are supposedly millions of years apart. Another time we found fossils of animals which in order to fit the theory are supposed to have been extinct for millions of years and we find them in a layer that is supposedly only 50-100k years old. I'm not making a call one way or the other. I want people to have all the information but in the corporate world, you keep your mouth shut and your head down and get paid. Sorry but that's what's smart. Don't believe everything in your text books, it might get you into trouble or into a very emotionally charged argument that's taking your time away from those that really matter, your family or friends. Have a great day!
-
Wow, um so this got out of hand fast. Hard to address all this but see "D" of my 1st post. Everyone got very emotional. I'm only speaking from experience as a geologist for Shell, I have seen mile long core samples and these are why I doubt all the suppositions they teach young people. One of the greatest tenants of the theory of evolution is that the geologic column supports period fossils, this is all a lie. The sad truth is, while digging all over the world we find things that shouldn't be, dare I say "can't" be together. Namely dinosaur remains with human remains in close proximity and in the same sedimentary layer. Now, honestly, we are told that this isn't our job if we say something about "scientific discovery" and that's the truth. We are there to help facilitate extraction in the safest possible way, period. Other examples of things we found, if you are curious are trees, that obviously we're alive when they were buried in layers of sediment. This in general is not a problem but these trees will cross layers of sediment that are supposedly millions of years apart. Another time we found fossils of animals which in order to fit the theory are supposed to have been extinct for millions of years and we find them in a layer that is supposedly only 50-100k years old. I'm not making a call one way or the other. I want people to have all the information but in the corporate world, you keep your mouth shut and your head down and get paid. Sorry but that's what's smart. Don't believe everything in your text books, it might get you into trouble or into a very emotionally charged argument that's taking your time away from those that really matter, your family or friends. Have a great day!
-
Edited by Britton: 5/10/2015 10:53:15 PMA. The Theory of Gravity is supported by the Law of Gravity. B. Correction, evolution had been observed. C. There are many mechanisms that drive evolution. Not different kinds of evolution. D. That's fair. Where do you work?[spoiler]because I don't believe you're a scientist[/spoiler]
-
[quote]A. Gravity is a law, not a theory. B. Microevolution has been observed in nature, time and time again. C. There are at least 5, possibly more depending on who you are debating with, other types of evolution, including macroevolution which are still scientifically seen as hypotheses since they have never been seen occur in laboratory or field conditions. D. Science is not something to be handled by someone in an emotional state. It just becomes spittle and drivel coming out of an uninformed mouth. This is not meant to be offensive, it's an observation I have made as a scientist where when someone wants to fight so hard for a point that they ignore the empirical data and/or their own limits. Have a nice day everyone![/quote] Gravitational [i]theory[/i], Theory of General Relativity. Within Gravitational theory are those laws. For example in cell theory, your have 3 main "laws" or principles. 1 All living things are made of one or more cells. 2 The cell is the most basic unit of life. 3 cells arise from preexisting living cells. Macro and Micro evolution are not real terms. They were coined by creationists who couldn't understand it. I haven't ignored any data, no one has presented anything credible.
-
Edited by Puptart: 5/10/2015 9:08:17 PMNewton's [i]LAW[/i] of Universal Gravitation http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/circles/Lesson-3/Newton-s-Law-of-Universal-Gravitation There are both laws and theories, This is the most general of the amount, most referenced ruling for gravity. You are looking at relativity, look at your facts before throwing them around. Also, site sources. No one believes somone in a logos argument without sources.
-
https://www.bungie.net/en/Forum/Post/118440395/0/0 You're misconception is not a rare one. I addressed this before because I'm sick of seeing it
-
You know what I am also sick and tired of, people attacking The creation community, it's frustrating. I mean seriously, we have our own beliefs, do we have to attack eachother over it. Yes, ok, im wrong with the theory thing. Ok, you happy science community that has some fetish with destroying the belief of creationism. I only came on here because I am sick and tired of these posts, it hurts my conscience just to look at these type of posts being smack talked every day.
-
Because your creationist idea doesn't have any scientific evidence. 0, zilch, supports it.
-
Show me the proof. I will not believe unless shown the proof. I have been shown the proof of creationism many of times. And no, not through the bible. Through Science. Anyways, peace, I'm sick and tired of pointless arguments.
-
Edited by Britton: 5/10/2015 10:52:38 PMShow you proof that creationism has no proof? Sure all the proof for it is in the spoiler[spoiler][/spoiler] Tell ya what, give me 1 piece of evidence for creationism. Just one.
-
Explain how the Eyeball came from evolution and I might listen to you....
-
Edited by Britton: 5/10/2015 11:08:27 PMInstead of me typing a giant wall of text trying to reinvent the wheel, just watch this link. Its explained much better than I can do. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2a47b2_cosmos-a-space-time-odyssey-season-01-episode-02_school And I would still like 1 piece of evidence for creationism.
-
You just rekt his ass
-
Correct, there is a law of Gravity. Nothing new there.
-
you just tried to prove his post wrong by calling it a theory =.= u gone incoherent.
-
No, within a scientific theory you find what backs it up. Facts, observations, [i]laws[/i] and all sorts of evidence.
-
Laws are not within theory, its like Science rock paper scissors. You cannot beat a law with a teory, hypothesis, anything. So much for evolution theory, its all boring ass wannabe laws.
-
Wow I guess you don't understand what a scientific theory is. I thought this killed to birds with one stone, http://www.nas.edu/evolution/TheoryOrFact.html
-
Here is the question, since you consider theory a "fact" why are there FACTS that disprove the "facts" of this so called theory? You really are at a loss of logic.
-
Name those facts that disprove The theory of Evolution.
