EVOLUTION, what a lie.

[Magic Man]

Response: Yes brother, they've invented new words. There is no such thing as a scientific definition of "theory", the proof is the simple fact that no dictionary on the face of the planet has this definition. Therefore, the definition is made up.

Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.

Source

Is there any point at which you stop just refusing to see things? I mean, you're flat out rejecting things like definitions of words that can be shown to you. I've seen willful ignorance before, but this takes the cake.

 

[Fatihah]

Yours is not necessarily false, but the difference is that with yours all we have to go on is what someone else said. With evolution and science in general, we can see the results or processes ourselves. It would be akin to every human being able to see that miracle.

Response: But your conclusion is based off heresay, not proof. You've been told by scientists that they've seen a species evolve into another and accepted it blindly without proof. You can see many things in science, I agree, but no one has seen a species evolve into another. Not even you. You trust scientists so much that all a scientists has to say is that "it happened" and you believe it. That's not proof.

 

[Magic Man]

Response: But your conclusion is based off heresay, not proof. You've been told by scientists that they've seen a species evolve into another and accepted it blindly without proof. You can see many things in science, I agree, but no one has seen a species evolve into another. Not even you. You trust scientists so much that all a scientists has to say is that "it happened" and you believe it. That's not proof.

I'm not sure how else to say this to you. I don't trust scientists because I think they're good guys. I trust them because I can see their work and see what they are telling me for myself. I can watch evolution happen with my very own eyes. If they tell me something that doesn't seem to make sense, then I question it until I see the evidence that made them come to their conclusion.

Also, you really need to stop claiming that no one has seen a species evolve into another. It's really annoying. Believe what you want, but you've been told and shown many times now that people have seen and do see species evolve into different ones. Putting your fingers in your ears and saying "LALALALALA, I can't hear you" is not an effective debate tactic. It's effective if you want to continue to believe your fundamentalist religious beliefs in the face of clear and obvious evidence against them, but not for having a debate. This is as bad as someone saying "The sky is blue. Here are pictures, videos and accounts of it." and you saying "No, the sky is not blue and no one has ever seen it being blue."

 

[Fatihah]

Source

Is there any point at which you stop just refusing to see things? I mean, you're flat out rejecting things like definitions of words that can be shown to you. I've seen willful ignorance before, but this takes the cake.

Response: And I've seen brainwashing before, but this takes the cake. You've just provided a definition of the word "theory", read it, and still drew the wrong conclusion. A theory is not "Fact". A theory is an explaination supported by "facts", but the conclusion is not "fact" which is exactly what I've said and is exactly what your own defintion says. Amazing. Yet you read it and still draw the wrong meaning. No where does it say that "A theory is a fact".

When you can't even comprehend what you've read, you've reached a level of being programmed in the most extreme way. Simply Amazing.

 

[Magic Man]

Response: And I've seen brainwashing before, but this takes the cake. You've just provided a definition of the word "theory", read it, and still drew the wrong conclusion. A theory is not "Fact". A theory is an explaination supported by "facts", but the conclusion is not "fact" which is exactly what I've said and is exactly what your own defintion says. Amazing. Yet you read it and still draw the wrong meaning. No where does it say that "A theory is a fact".

When you can't even comprehend what you've read, you've reached a level of being programmed in the most extreme way. Simply Amazing.

OK, this is not hard. You even said it yourself. It is based on facts. The Theory of Evolution is made up of a bunch of different facts. If you don't like calling it a fact, fine, but it's basically a whole bunch of facts.

 

[darkendless]

When you can't even comprehend what you've read, you've reached a level of being programmed in the most extreme way. Simply Amazing.

Comming from a fanatical muslim

 

[Fatihah]

I'm not sure how else to say this to you. I don't trust scientists because I think they're good guys. I trust them because I can see their work and see what they are telling me for myself. I can watch evolution happen with my very own eyes. If they tell me something that doesn't seem to make sense, then I question it until I see the evidence that made them come to their conclusion.

Also, you really need to stop claiming that no one has seen a species evolve into another. It's really annoying. Believe what you want, but you've been told and shown many times now that people have seen and do see species evolve into different ones. Putting your fingers in your ears and saying "LALALALALA, I can't hear you" is not an effective debate tactic. It's effective if you want to continue to believe your fundamentalist religious beliefs in the face of clear and obvious evidence against them, but not for having a debate. This is as bad as someone saying "The sky is blue. Here are pictures, videos and accounts of it." and you saying "No, the sky is not blue and no one has ever seen it being blue."

Response: And what you need to do is stop being hypocritical and illogical in your argument. Telling me it's been proven that people have seen evolution simply because they've said so then not accepting the accounts of scholars who have witness accounts of people seeing prophets perform miracles is hypocrisy on your part and thus a fallacy in your logic.

 

[Magic Man]

Response: And what you need to do is stop being hypocritical and illogical in your argument. Telling me it's been proven that people have seen evolution simply because they've said so then not accepting the accounts of scholars who have witness accounts of people seeing prophets perform miracles is hypocrisy on your part and thus a fallacy in your logic.

And what you need to do is actually start listening or this is pointless. I'm not sure how to get it through your head at this point. I'm not accepting anything simply because someone tells me. I'm accepting things because I can see them with my own eyes. I can see evolution with my own eyes. I can see everything science tells me with my own eyes. I never said it's proven that people have seen evolution simply because they said so. I said it was proven that people have seen evolution because they've said so and they've shown me what they saw, so that I could see it with my very own eyes. If I saw your miracle with my own eyes, I'd probably believe that, too.

 

[Fatihah]

OK, this is not hard. You even said it yourself. It is based on facts. The Theory of Evolution is made up of a bunch of different facts. If you don't like calling it a fact, fine, but it's basically a whole bunch of facts.

Response: Exactly, but the conclusion is not a fact. That's what a theory is. This is simple english. A theory contains factual evidence, but the conclusion is not "fact". That's why it's called a theory. There's a reason why the water cycle is not called the "water cycle theory" yet the big bang is called the big bang "theory" and evolution is called the "Theory" of Evolution. Because one is a proven fact and one is an explaination with factual evidence to support it. But the evidence can not conclude it to be "fact".

 

[Fatihah]

Comming from a fanatical muslim

Response: Words of a person in denial.

 

[Magic Man]

Response: Exactly, but the conclusion is not a fact. That's what a theory is. This is simple english. A theory contains factual evidence, but the conclusion is not "fact". That's why it's called a theory. There's a reason why the water cycle is not called the "water cycle theory" yet the big bang is called the big bang "theory" and evolution is called the "Theory" of Evolution. Because one is a proven fact and one is an explaination with factual evidence to support it. But the evidence can not conclude it to be "fact".

I'm confused. If you accept that it's a bunch of facts, then why do you not accept the theory?

Also, by the way, no one was claiming that "fact" is a definition for "theory". The claim was that the theory of evolution is a fact, and it is, as much as the law of gravity is a fact.

 

[darkendless]

Response: Words of a person in denial.

In denial of what exactly? Denial of the greatness of Allah that cannot be seen? Yup, im in denial of some great fairytales alright.

 

[Ghostaka]

In denial of what exactly? Denial of the greatness of Allah that cannot be seen? Yup, im in denial of some great fairytales alright.

You did it again alright :foot: .

Peace be upon you.

 

[darkendless]

You did it again alright :foot: .

Peace be upon you.

From this discusion, religion and Islam in particular has shown to inhibit the critical analysis skills of members here.
In light of such weight in favour of evolution, and the level of debate here, fairytales is putting it nicely.

 

[Tristesse]

Your absolutely right, there isn't any "proof" for ToE, but there is insurmountable evidence. And once again science does not deal with proofs it deals with evidence. And science draws conclusions from the evidence it gathers. Evolution is a fact, it's really not even up for debate at this point.

Response: You're contridicting yourself. You just said:

"Your absolutely right, there isn't any "proof" for ToE, but there is insurmountable evidence."

But you concluded with:

"Evolution is a fact, it's really not even up for debate at this point".

That's a contridiction. Something can't be shown to be a fact without proof.[/QUOTE]

Yes something can be shown to be a fact without proof. The two are not mutually exclusive. A fact can be something completely evidentiary based, proof means nothing in the world of science. It seems to me that you are looking for absolute proof, well, nothing has absolute proof, thats why we gather evidence and draw conclusions from what we find. I will repeat it again evolution is a fact. Change over time occurs.

 

[Fatihah]

From this discusion, religion and Islam in particular has shown to inhibit the critical analysis skills of members here.
In light of such weight in favour of evolution, and the level of debate here, fairytales is putting it nicely.

Response: Yet you believe in the fairy tale called the "Theory of Evolution".

 

[darkendless]

Response: Yet you believe in the fairy tale called the "Theory of Evolution".

I can go outside and see evolution, or go to my university.

Where do i have to go to see your God? Oh wait, thats right, i cant. What a shame

 

[Fatihah]

I'm confused. If you accept that it's a bunch of facts, then why do you not accept the theory?

Also, by the way, no one was claiming that "fact" is a definition for "theory". The claim was that the theory of evolution is a fact, and it is, as much as the law of gravity is a fact.

Response: Simple. Because the facts don't prove the conclusion. That's why it's called a theory.

BTW, I never claimed that "fact" is the definition of "theory". However, a theory is not a fact. It's an explanation based on facts.

 

[OmarKhayyam]

I can go outside and see evolution, or go to my university.

Where do i have to go to see your God? Oh wait, thats right, i cant. What a shame

Sure you can.

Close your eyes. Imagine REAL hard - there it is- in full glory - just like the (whatever holy book) says. You can SEE it. As long as you don't open your eyes.

See how easy that was.

 

[OmarKhayyam]

Response: Simple. Because the facts don't prove the conclusion. That's why it's called a theory.

BTW, I never claimed that "fact" is the definition of "theory". However, a theory is not a fact. It's an explanation based on facts.

But Fatty, you have all those disinfectants in your medicine cabinet based on the Germ Theory of Disease.

Why do you do that. It is just a theory.

bwt, I'll believe your moon story when you DO IT!