Right, since this is not a thread to argue. So, would you mind telling us what is YOUR understanding of the Theory of Evolution?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Creationist - what is your understanding of TOE?
- Thread starter Big_TJ
- Start date
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
When creationists argue against ToE, they argue against a non-existent theory, such as the theory that science says that God does not exist, or they theory that life popped into existence. Most people who actually understand ToE readily accept it, because once you do, it's hard to imagine how it could NOT work--it makes so much sense. So they put a lot of energy into NOT understanding it, so they can continue to oppose it.
Why do they want to combat a non-existent theory? Because they have been told that their eternal salvation depends on rejecting it, and they believe this.
As Pegg said, if evolution is correct, she will become an atheist. This is a problem, because of course it is. So they have to find something else and label it evolution, so they can continue to not believe it!
Why do they want to combat a non-existent theory? Because they have been told that their eternal salvation depends on rejecting it, and they believe this.
As Pegg said, if evolution is correct, she will become an atheist. This is a problem, because of course it is. So they have to find something else and label it evolution, so they can continue to not believe it!
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Theory....
imaginative contemplation of reality.
So says Webster's.
Now add all you know concerning evolution.
David M
Well-Known Member
Webster's actual definition.
1: the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2: abstract thought : speculation
3: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art <music theory>
4a : a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action <her method is based on the theory that all children want to learn>
b : an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances —often used in the phrase in theory <in theory, we have always advocated freedom for all>
5: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>
6a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation
b : an unproved assumption : conjecture
c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject <theory of equations>
We know that creationism comes under 2, but a scientific theory does not.
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
I'm sorry, Thief, I don't bother responding to your posts, because they usually don't make sense to me.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
I did quote accurately....
and the meaning is clear.
Theory is imaginative contemplation of reality.
David M
Well-Known Member
You quoted innacurately, the accurate statements would be as below:
One meaning of theory is an imaginative contemplation of reality.
or
Theory can mean an imaginative contemplation of reality.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Thief, I am going to tell you what I frequently have to tell many dishonest Creationists.
When you intentionally confuse the colloquial use of the word 'theory' with the use of 'Scientific Theory', you are either willfully dishonest or woefully ignorant.
A theory, in the colloquial sense, is hardly more than an educated guess.
A theory, in the scientific sense, is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers.
A Scientific Theory, such as the Theory of Evolution, is generally accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole, because it presents evidence that explains the fact of biological evolution.
Other Scientific Theories are...
The Theory of Gravity
Einstein's General Theory of Relativity
Circuit Theory
Germ Theory
Convection Theory
Etc, etc, etc...
There, now we can say you have been educated on the subject.
Now if you continue to confuse the word, we will have to assume intentional dishonesty.
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
:clap
You are spot on. How we use the word ("theory") in our daily vernacular is completely different than how it is used in the field of science. The daily use is tantamount to using it as a "slang" word.
camanintx
Well-Known Member
Maybe you should look up the definition of "semantics".
David M
Well-Known Member
And "misrepresent".
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Thief
Rogue Theologian
On the contrary....I am not contrary.....
I do believe in evolution.
There simply is no proof it.
You would need that missing link...which is still missing.
That you prefer to use the word 'theory' as a substitute for 'proof'
does not bother me.
But there is a difference.
outhouse
Atheistically
thats because science doesnt prove anything, they observe facts. facst of evolution have been observed over and over a thousand times over.
missing link for what.
as far as humans go they have a very clear transitional list of species for a 7 million year period.
you have been explained quite well the difference between a normal theory and a scientific theory. Evolution is both theory and fact.
McBell
Unbound
Except that it does not say what you claimed it said.
It seems that most people who reject the theory of evolution dont understand it. But it is also true that some people who accept the theory of evolution dont understand it. You say that you accept the theory of evolution, but frankly that doesnt matter. What is more important is that you understand the theory of evolution, and judging by your posts it is evident that you dont. Here are two points for you to consider.
First if you are talking about proof in the absolute sense you are correct, there is no absolute proof of evolution. But you must understand that there is no absolute proof of anything in science. You should also understand that there are mountains of evidence supporting the theory of evolution. There is more evidence supporting the theory of evolution than there is for most accepted scientific theories.
Second, there is no missing link. This is a myth that was created by the popular media. The idea was that there was some special fossil out there that once found would prove the theory of evolution. It paints a very dramatic picture, gives a sense of adventure to paleontology. But it is just not true. There is no missing link, the evidence that we have now is overwhelming. And no new fossil will ever prove evolution in the absolute sense. Nothing is ever proven in the absolute sense.
DeistPrimate
Member
If you don't think there's any "proof" of evolution why do you "believe" in it?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
here's your sign.....
....imaginative contemplation of reality...
...an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principals or circumstances.
...as distinguished from applied art or science.
...the coherent set of hypothetical, conceptual, and pragmatic principles forming the general frame for a field of inquiry
...a judgment, preposition, or formula formed by speculation
...a hypothetical entity or structure explaining or relating to an observed set of facts.
...a working of hypothesis given probability by experimental evidence or by factual or conceptual analysis...BUT NOT conclusively established or accepted as law.
...something taken for granted esp. on trivial or inadequate grounds
syn...conjecture...speculation...supposition
Through out the entire definition ...which you can read....in Webster's...
the word 'proof' is not there.
There are many 'facts' that you can fall back on.
And the collection of facts led to theory.
No proof yet.