• Howdy! Welcome to our community of more than 130.000 members devoted to web hosting. This is a great place to get special offers from web hosts and post your own requests or ads. To start posting sign up here. Cheers! /Peo, FreeWebSpace.net
managed wordpress hosting

ron paul does not accept evoloution.

Proven, though? Not to my knowledge, and I am an avid reader and researcher of all thing scientific. It's theorized, but not proven. Be careful with how you word things.
 
The evolution of man is certainly a sore spot for both sides of the debate, but there are some clear cut things everyone needs to understand.

Evolutionist believe in natural selection, a well documented phenomena (survival of the fittest). Creationist do not believe in this.

Creationists believe that God created the world 6000 years ago. This mean ignoring everything the scientific community has found to be more than 6000 years old. For example, Creationists believe that dinosaurs are animals that God destroyed in the great flood, and are actually about 5000 years old. Evolutionists, as you may have guess do not believe this.

You can argue about where man comes from all day long, but the truth is that we do not know. I believe that the best guesses come from people who make the study of our origins their life's work and not those who chose to ignore millions of years of geological history.
 
if we evolved from apes there wouldn't be anymore apes in this world.

Now, since this is getting to be WAY off topic, lets keep it back on the political aspect instead of what we all believe in. Shall we? :)

It's not fair to basically say "what you're saying is wrong, now change topic and do not rebuttle me!"

Proven, though? Not to my knowledge, and I am an avid reader and researcher of all thing scientific. It's theorized, but not proven. Be careful with how you word things.
Not to your knowledge? You obviously just don't want to accept evolution, which is odd since you being "an avid reader and researcher of all thing scientific", you'd understand that evolution doesn't explain how we got here, so you shouldn't have much of a religious problem with it. So either you don't understand evolution, or you want to be different.

No matter what it is, you don't understand the scientific definition of the word "theory". It's really a correlation of facts. If you're denying evolution on the basis that it's a theory, then you have to deny gravity and the fact that the Earth moves around the Sun -- they're all theories.
 
then you have to deny gravity and the fact that the Earth moves around the Sun -- they're all theories.

No silly the earth revolves around me. I thought everybody knew that?

On a serious note, The theory of evolution has been argued for decades, and nobody ever wins. An opinion is an opinion, each person is unique and each person's opinion is unique. Thats that. This thread could continue for hours and hours and you still won't be able to resolve if evolution actually exists or not. Each person's opinion is different on the matter, and you should just agree to disagree.
 
Johnson, I'm actually not talking about beliefs or understanding - instead, I am talking about proof. I have yet to even say which side of this I fall on - and I won't say. :)

You are wrong about theories: these things you mention were theories - at one time. They have since been proven to be true and are, therefore, now facts.

Dictionary.com defines theory this way:

1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3. Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
6. contemplation or speculation.
7. guess or conjecture.

Clearly, theories are not facts. :)
 
Dictionary.com defines theory this way:



Clearly, theories are not facts. :)

If you actually read those definitions you'll see that theories can be facts.

80yddgk.png
 
Last edited:
Johnson said:
It's not fair to basically say "what you're saying is wrong, now change topic and do not rebuttle me!"
It's very fair, and supa fun too! :D

Colin said:
Did you not look at my diagram?
Here it is again.

I looked, and ignored. Silly Colin :p
 
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /miscellanea/archive/2007-01-15 -- science vs faith.png on this server.
You may need to create an index.html page or enable the directory browsing by creating an .htaccess file containing "Options +Indexes".



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apache/1.3.37 Server at www.wellingtongrey.net Port 80

I love that previous picture!
 
Johnson, I'm actually not talking about beliefs or understanding - instead, I am talking about proof. I have yet to even say which side of this I fall on - and I won't say. :)

It's obvious you don't accept evolution, you're not fooling anyone.

You are wrong about theories: these things you mention were theories - at one time. They have since been proven to be true and are, therefore, now facts.

Dictionary.com defines theory this way:

Clearly, theories are not facts. :)
In science, theory has a different definition:
Wikipedia said:
In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from or is supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method).

Aparantly all these theories you think have been made facts didn't include gravity, because it is a theory at present -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity

So, clearly, you're wrong.
 
The theory goes that the types divided because of environment. People in the south for example are better suited to living there, thus you end up with blacks and whites. The same theory can be applied to apes, 96% of our genetic code is the same, and that 4% is simply us adapting to our environment. The apes changed otherwise, just not in the same way, in a way that suited them at the time.

:lol: People in the South have not evolved differently than the rest of the world
 
Back
Top