[_ Old Earth _] Are you guys serious?

[Pard]

One of the most used lines in an evolutionist's phrase book is, "Evolution is a fact!"

Now, before I ask the main question let me see if we can get a clarification on this phrase. When you say "evolution" do you mean micro-evolution (please do not start on a rant about there being no such thing as micro-evolution, you know what I mean) or do you mean evolution on a far grander scale, something that explains all origins of life and explains for such a wide variety of species by saying they came from a single "uber-grandfather" organism?

(If you answered that you define evolution as the later of the two, answer this next question)

Now on to the big question. Do you honestly and seriously believe that evolution is a fact? That evolution is as apparent as gravity? That it is as obvious as a round earth?

It'll be interesting to see what you guys say because I have seen many of you guys claim evolution to be as much a fact as gravity or a round planet.

 

[jwu]

Now on to the big question. Do you honestly and seriously believe that evolution is a fact? That evolution is as apparent as gravity? That it is as obvious as a round earth?

Yes, it is as apparent and obvious if one looks at the right places, ie. genetics. Evolution ties pretty much all of biology together, its workings are visible all over the place.

If you have a better theory that explains the data even more concisely and elegantly as the ToE, then i'd like to learn about it. I'm not emotionally tied to the ToE, it's just that any rival theory will have to be measured against the standards that the ToE fulfills - these are very high. What particular predictions does it make about the distribution of ERVs among hominids?

 

[logical bob]

Yes, I'm absolutely serious.

 

[jasoncran]

some doubt that dont believe in god, just not on this forum.

they are there.
thou mayest doubt God, but never doubt darwin.

 

[jwu]

thou mayest doubt God, but never doubt darwin.

The ToE has gone a long way since Darwin, he wouldn't recognize much of his own work in the modern synthesis of the theory if he saw it.

Yet, the ToE is constantly doubted and put to the test. It just happens to pass these tests with flying colors. The one scientist who eventually may overturn it will earn a nearly guaranteed Nobel prize, get rich and famous and will be hailed as the new Einstein (who became famous by overturning Newtonian physics - the same story, basically, just with a different branch of science). There is no reason why a sane scientist would not try to cast doubt on it. That just happens to be extraordinarily difficult, which puts the theory itself in a very good light.

 

[jasoncran]

really.

please.i'm not stupid,. darwin is not to be doubted let alone challenged these days.

otherwise why the statements by the evo supporters, no serious scientist doubts evolution?

some may doubt because they dont accept skinners idea on learned behavior or for other reasons.

isnt that what supposedly science is, ask and never assume anything is settled?

 

[jwu]

please.i'm not stupid,. darwin is not to be doubted let alone challenged these days.

He absolutely is. One just has to make sure that one's evidence is watertight. It's the same as if a physicist were to doubt that electricity consists of moving electrons. If the evidence is on his side, then he will eventually prevail. If he made sloppy mistakes inn his experiments, then he will be (rightfully) laughed at.

otherwise why the statements by the evo supporters, no serious scientist doubts evolution?

That's not to mean that one mustn't doubt Darwin (which makes little sense taken literally anyway, as the ToE has changed a lot since Darwin's days), but that it is so massievely supported by evidence that pretty much all serious scientists find it futile to try to falsify it. To them, it's like trying to prove that the sky isn't actually blue. A waste of time. Yet if someone actually came across a way to falsify the ToE, there would be no reason not to publicize it.

isnt that what supposedly science is, ask and never assume anything is settled?

Yep, and the ToE is constantly tested with new discoveries in e.g. genetics. Every new discovery there could crash it. So far they all fit together rather nicely though, requiring just small adjustments of the theory.

Then again, this is taken straight from the Answers in Genesis statement of faith:

By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record

http://www.answersingenesis.org/about/faith
Ouch. So much for an open mind and allowing doubt.

 

[jasoncran]

so, these guys that seem to have doubts then are wrong, its settled then
can we stop looking and wasting my taxpayer money then, after we have enough 'evidence' then.

lets pull all funding then to the digs in anystate for fossils or any reasearch on anything on the toe, no need to verify after all the evidence is overwhelming we know that it's happening

tell me why are we still looking then? do we need to know anymore then.

please convince me that we still need to fix those "holes" then if its that solid then.

 

[jwu]

so, these guys that seem to have doubts then are wrong, its settled then

They may be right, their work just will be put under a very high level of scrutiny.

can we stop looking and wasting my taxpayer money then, after we have enough 'evidence' then.

What taxpayer money?

lets pull all funding then to the digs in anystate for fossils or any reasearch on anything on the toe, no need to verify after all the evidence is overwhelming we know that it's happening

Paleological digs are performed because we want to know what the past was like, not to confirm the ToE. Huge difference.

tell me why are we still looking then? do we need to know anymore then.

We aren't looking for evidence for the ToE, but for paleological records that are interesting in their own right.

please convince me that we still need to fix those "holes" then if its that solid then.

There wll always be open questions until we have the entire fossil record available and genetica totally figured out. Is there any particular open question, or "hole", as you call it, whose answer you believe will eventually overturn the ToE? Please be specific.

 

[jasoncran]

in america we fund reasearch, ie colleges do reasearch do they not in america.
i know they do, i live near two facilites that do reasearch, three really

heard of harbor branch, and ucf?

 

[Barbarian]

please.i'm not stupid,. darwin is not to be doubted let alone challenged these days.

Not only challenged, but revised. Much of what Darwin wrote turned out to be wrong. His four basic points of the theory remain true, however. But acquired traits aren't inherited as he thought they might be. And heredity is like sorting beads, not like mixing paint, as everyone assumed earlier.

otherwise why the statements by the evo supporters, no serious scientist doubts evolution?

Comparing figures from the Discovery Institute on "scientists who doubt Darwin", and "Project Steve", about 0.3% of biologists don't accept evolutionary theory.

It remains constantly challenged. The big rewards in science go to the guys who overturn existing theories. But you have to be right. That's the hard part.

 

[jasoncran]

so paleontology find such as the recent the mammoth aren't used for the support of the toe? or ardi really?

coulda fooled me

riddle me this, if by evo we came, how does culture come to be by happen stance,

what does n.s have to do with behavior such as artistic talent, and other things? morality and so on.

how did we come to moral and morees?

 

[jwu]

in america we fund reasearch, ie colleges do reasearch do they not in america.
i know they do, i live near two facilites that do reasearch, three really

heard of harbor branch, and ucf?

So which particular projects do these colleges perform which specifically aim at providing evidence for the ToE?

 

[jasoncran]

scientist are human last i checked, though i beginning to doubt that.

we are prone to peer pressure correct. show me where a group that doenst have peer pressure?not even the church is immune to that.

so scientist shouldn't ask those questions and try to find a way to look for alternative explanations then. if there is cause, to me there is.

 

[jasoncran]

in america we fund reasearch, ie colleges do reasearch do they not in america.
i know they do, i live near two facilites that do reasearch, three really

heard of harbor branch, and ucf?

So which particular projects do these colleges perform which specifically aim at providing evidence for the ToE?

harbor branch, is the facility that discovered the hms titanic at one time was a private organisation,

ucf is a college , give me a few minutes and i will post few reasearch projects.ucf (home of the gators is a state funded instution

i know that fsu is funded by the state of florida, and they have done some reasearch into synthetic cells.

 

[jwu]

so paleontology find such as the recent the mammoth aren't used for the support of the toe? or ardi really?

They happen to fit into the framework of the ToE, which in itself is evidence for the ToE (as it made successful predictions). That was not the purpose of the dig though, but a mere secondary effect.

riddle me this, if by evo we came, how does culture come to be by happen stance,

what does n.s have to do with behavior such as artistic talent, and other things? morality and so on.

how did we come to moral and morees?

Morality depends directly on intelligence. You won't find much moral behaviour among species that act mostly instinctively. Among those that possess intelligence however amoral behaviour is selected against by ostracizing individuals that do not conform to a certain set of behavioural patterns, up to the point of actually killing them in extreme cases, as countermeasures against the perceived unacceptable acts. What actually is deemed moral and what is not is subject to change though.

harbor branch, is the facility that discovered the hms titanic at one time was a private organisation,

ucf is a college , give me a few minutes and i will post few reasearch projects.ucf (home of the gators is a state funded instution

i know that fsu is funded by the state of florida, and they have done some reasearch into synthetic cells.

I'm only interested in projects that specifically seek evidence for the ToE. And be reminded, that those very projects could also come up with evidence against the ToE, thus actually helping your case.

 

[jasoncran]

ah but we ARE paying tax payer money to fund something that we already know is settled, kinda pointless.

thats like me asking myself what color my truck is when i know its blue.

http://biology.cos.ucf.edu/research_genetics.php

 

[jasoncran]

you didnt answer on how we got the ability to aprreciate art or how it happened suffieciently.

morality is only based on survival?
really.

 

[jasoncran]

you didnt answer on how we got the ability to aprreciate art or how it happened suffieciently.

morality is only based on survival?
really.

 

[Pard]

Well, totally ignoring the last batch of posts, sure it is interesting stuff, but...

I got the answers I had figured I'd get, because like I said, I have seen you guys say this before.

Bob, do you seriously think it is as obvious and true as gravity or the spherical nature of earth?