taks Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 scientific "proof" is another misnomer though it is a bit of a semantic nit. proofs are generally relegated to mathematics. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkan Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 . if you want proof for creation u'd have to read the bible with an open mind which i doubt most of you are willing to do so if you want proof, this is prolly the wrong topic The bible offers proof of only one thing, and that is not of creation. "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. 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 greater danger." - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials "I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 uh, technically evolution is a theory. as i said, many (if not most) aspects of evolution are indeed fact, or at least testable (observable as well). though as a whole, it is a theory. i also noted that there are few scientific theories that ever make it into the realm of law or "fact." that's just the nature of science i guess. taks Very few things have any level of certainty in the world of science. To take things as fact when nothing truly is, is a weakness. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkan Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 scientific "proof" is another misnomer though it is a bit of a semantic nit. proofs are generally relegated to mathematics. taks Now you're just being silly. "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. 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 greater danger." - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials "I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WITHTEETH Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Whats harder to believe. That the universe was created by a complex intelligent designer(scientology beings or Abrahamic god) Where did those being come from then? Or that The universe always existed, partivles always collided and crashed discovering random compatibility with eachother by trial and error? We have a mechanism called evolution that works. To say ______ (<---put a gods name in the space) created the universe, makes us erase an entire mechanism (evolution) that works. There is no evidence for intelligent design, there is no theory of how it works except that its "complex" Its taking a step in the axial model, why not go back to Plato's Forms instead of the second rate philosophy of today. Always outnumbered, never out gunned! Unreal Tournament 2004 Handle:Enlight_2.0 Myspace Website! My rig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seejai Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 well since i know my point of view has been said and its not really making an impact and no offense but im not sure of the point of this topic bc i know we'll never really agree or anything but its been interesting sharing opinions with yall and i think you need to read alot of the bible to judge if it was written by men.... well with that said im going to go swim or something so have fun doing what ur doing "She was short, she was furry, she was loud, and she was determined to sell him a melon"- random passage from Spector of the Past by Timothy Zahn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Now you're just being silly. no, not at all. go look up the definition of the scientific method and you'll not see the word "proof" anywhere. you will see the word "disproof," however, as it is much easier to disprove than it is to prove just about anything. science is about finding evidence to support hypothesis, at which point, assuming there is enough evidence, hypothesis can be treated as theory. disproof is as simple as finding a counter example most times. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WITHTEETH Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Tak are you saying its incorrect to call evolution a fact? I think you might be playing semantics if you are implying so. uh, technically evolution is a theory. as i said, many (if not most) aspects of evolution are indeed fact, or at least testable (observable as well). though as a whole, it is a theory. i also noted that there are few scientific theories that ever make it into the realm of law or "fact." that's just the nature of science i guess. taks A Scientific Theory and a generic English definition of a theory are different. Evolution is a fact. Its not absolute, there are none in the scientific realm of reality, at least that we can ever prove beyond a doubt. Evolution is a fact of statistics, in every theory or even law there are straggling new discoveries being found being added and examined, gravity, plate tectonics, and evolution included. Their facts, until proven otherwise. Science is self correcting, gotta love it. Always outnumbered, never out gunned! Unreal Tournament 2004 Handle:Enlight_2.0 Myspace Website! My rig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 That the universe was created by a complex intelligent designer(scientology beings or Abrahamic god) Where did those being come from then? Or that The universe always existed, partivles always collided and crashed discovering random compatibility with eachother by trial and error? a bit of a bifurcation only because the leading theories of how the universe "came to be" don't all assume a persistent universe. big bang still rules, and time before that is meaningless. close enough to occam's razor, however, to make your point. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkan Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Now you're just being silly. no, not at all. go look up the definition of the scientific method and you'll not see the word "proof" anywhere. you will see the word "disproof," however, as it is much easier to disprove than it is to prove just about anything. science is about finding evidence to support hypothesis, at which point, assuming there is enough evidence, hypothesis can be treated as theory. disproof is as simple as finding a counter example most times. taks Gah, I know very well what you're talking about...I was referring to your being pedantic. "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. 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 greater danger." - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials "I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Whats harder to believe. That the universe was created by a complex intelligent designer(scientology beings or Abrahamic god) Where did those being come from then? Or that The universe always existed, partivles always collided and crashed discovering random compatibility with eachother by trial and error? We have a mechanism called evolution that works. To say ______ (<---put a gods name in the space) created the universe, makes us erase an entire mechanism (evolution) that works. There is no evidence for intelligent design, there is no theory of how it works except that its "complex" Its taking a step in the axial model, why not go back to Plato's Forms instead of the second rate philosophy of today. Actually I disagree on there is no evidence of intelligent design. Think on this. We have a moon that had propelled us to seek a way to reach it, to motivate us to see what is there. On that moon there just happens to be ice, water that we can use for it is necessary for our survival. Next we have Mars, which just happens to be terraformable and also has a source of water. By the time we get to Mars we will need large amount of metals and ore to continue and Earth is a long ways away. We now have the asteroid belt to get raw materials from. Now by this time we need a more fuel and even more water to do deep space missions. Where do we go? Jupiter and its moons, which one of them has tons of water just happen to be available and the gas giant itself is a good source of fuel if we can collect it. Now is this all coincidence that this happened? Maybe, but I don't believe in coincidence. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 A Scientific Theory and a generic English definition of a theory are different. given that we're talking about a scientific theory, the former prevails, and it favors my position. Evolution is a fact. Its not absolute, there are none in the scientific realm of reality, at least that we can ever prove beyond a doubt. then it is only theory if it cannot ever be completely proved. that's what "theory" means, sort of like "mostly proved, with a preponderance of evidence, but still tentative." you'll note that you never see it referred to as "the fact of evolution." not by dawkins, not by russell, not by any scientist. it is always "the theory of evolution." similarly "the theory of relativity" as an example. Evolution is a fact of statistics, in every theory or even law there are straggling new discoveries being found being added and examined, gravity, plate tectonics, and evolution included. Their facts, until proven otherwise. Science is self correcting, gotta love it. this is partly true. evolution is not purely a statistical creature. there's a bit more to it than that. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkan Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 and i think you need to read alot of the bible to judge if it was written by men.... What if I told you I have read "a lot" of the bible? "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. 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 greater danger." - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials "I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Gah, I know very well what you're talking about...I was referring to your being pedantic. well, we are debating a largely semantic nit. one that carries with it significant implications, but semantic nonetheless. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laozi Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 When judging these two things, I guess you could call them both belief systems in a very loose sense I would first judge how they came about. What are their purposes? People laugh when I say that I think a jellyfish is one of the most beautiful things in the world. What they don't understand is, I mean a jellyfish with long, blond hair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WITHTEETH Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Whats harder to believe. That the universe was created by a complex intelligent designer(scientology beings or Abrahamic god) Where did those being come from then? Or that The universe always existed, partivles always collided and crashed discovering random compatibility with eachother by trial and error? We have a mechanism called evolution that works. To say ______ (<---put a gods name in the space) created the universe, makes us erase an entire mechanism (evolution) that works. There is no evidence for intelligent design, there is no theory of how it works except that its "complex" Its taking a step in the axial model, why not go back to Plato's Forms instead of the second rate philosophy of today. Actually I disagree on there is no evidence of intelligent design. Think on this. We have a moon that had propelled us to seek a way to reach it, to motivate us to see what is there. On that moon there just happens to be ice, water that we can use for it is necessary for our survival. Next we have Mars, which just happens to be terraformable and also has a source of water. By the time we get to Mars we will need large amount of metals and ore to continue and Earth is a long ways away. We now have the asteroid belt to get raw materials from. Now by this time we need a more fuel and even more water to do deep space missions. Where do we go? Jupiter and its moons, which one of them has tons of water just happen to be available and the gas giant itself is a good source of fuel if we can collect it. Now is this all coincidence that this happened? Maybe, but I don't believe in coincidence. A Vacuous truth i believe. That is a logical fallacy. Right? Always outnumbered, never out gunned! Unreal Tournament 2004 Handle:Enlight_2.0 Myspace Website! My rig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 origins are always a matter of faith. there's no way to know conclusively what kicked off the "beginning" of life till we find a way to replicate it in a lab (this is one of the pieces of the evolution puzzle that has no evidence, which leaves it in the hypothesis land), nor the beginning of the universe for that matter. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WITHTEETH Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 The Current hypothesis is that the big bang was a super Cooled Higgs field. Always outnumbered, never out gunned! Unreal Tournament 2004 Handle:Enlight_2.0 Myspace Website! My rig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 A Vacuous truth i believe. That is a logical fallacy. Right? To just dismiss it as such would be silly in of itself. There is no way to accurately know the truth one way or another, but that much coincidence makes it statistically improbable. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Whats harder to believe. That the universe was created by a complex intelligent designer(scientology beings or Abrahamic god) Where did those being come from then? Or that The universe always existed, partivles always collided and crashed discovering random compatibility with eachother by trial and error? We have a mechanism called evolution that works. To say ______ (<---put a gods name in the space) created the universe, makes us erase an entire mechanism (evolution) that works. There is no evidence for intelligent design, there is no theory of how it works except that its "complex" Its taking a step in the axial model, why not go back to Plato's Forms instead of the second rate philosophy of today. Actually I disagree on there is no evidence of intelligent design. Think on this. We have a moon that had propelled us to seek a way to reach it, to motivate us to see what is there. On that moon there just happens to be ice, water that we can use for it is necessary for our survival. Next we have Mars, which just happens to be terraformable and also has a source of water. By the time we get to Mars we will need large amount of metals and ore to continue and Earth is a long ways away. We now have the asteroid belt to get raw materials from. Now by this time we need a more fuel and even more water to do deep space missions. Where do we go? Jupiter and its moons, which one of them has tons of water just happen to be available and the gas giant itself is a good source of fuel if we can collect it. Now is this all coincidence that this happened? Maybe, but I don't believe in coincidence. A Vacuous truth i believe. That is a logical fallacy. Right? I already pointed out what I feel is evidence for Intelligent Design, and no one addressed them. Love Courage Family Reason These are a few things that make me question the suuposed random nature of the universe. Why are we so different than one another? What is the human spirit? Why does my daughter have a personality of her own, instead of just acting exactly like my wife and I? Seriously, I find it hard NOT to believe that there is something greater at work here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laozi Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 I just wonder for those who subscribe to a religion or religious beliefs, don't you ever get the feeling that maybe this whole belief system is around to cheat you out of your life. To make your life of semi-servitude o.k. simply because of the promise of something else besides oblivion? People laugh when I say that I think a jellyfish is one of the most beautiful things in the world. What they don't understand is, I mean a jellyfish with long, blond hair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 (edited) That is do to the random firings of neurons and the changes in environmental effects in which your daughter is exposed to. To reason, to love, to have courage and to have strong familial bonds is not just seen in humans but also observed in other primate species. I suggest reading In the Shadow of Man by Jane Goodall. Edited July 18, 2007 by Sand Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 A Vacuous truth i believe. That is a logical fallacy. Right? yeah, a bit of a circular argument, or a tautology. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 To just dismiss it as such would be silly in of itself. There is no way to accurately know the truth one way or another, but that much coincidence makes it statistically improbable. your problem lies in the supposition that "statistically improbable" has meaning in this context. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 The Current hypothesis is that the big bang was a super Cooled Higgs field. yeah, perhaps. that'll change again i'm sure. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now