EVOLUTION, what a lie.

[Ghostaka]

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.

Have forgotten the definition of "critical analysis"? If that's not what we've been doing throughout this thread then I've been missing out!?!

On the contrary, if you hadn't put it as "fairytales" and something more insulting (?) perhaps; then you would really see your contribution to the "level of debate" here. You would be acting immature -- and that's really putting it nicely.

Peace be upon you.

 

[OmarKhayyam]

Response: Right. And the definition is made up. The definition should be found in a dictionary... But it's not. Therefore, it is made up.

As a matter of fact it is in the dictionary:

a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>

Look it up here

You do know HOW to that - right?

 

[darkendless]

Have forgotten the definition of "critical analysis"? If that's not what we've been doing throughout this thread then I've been missing out!?!

On the contrary, if you hadn't put it as "fairytales" and something more insulting (?) perhaps; then you would really see your contribution to the "level of debate" here. You would be acting immature -- and that's really putting it nicely.

Peace be upon you.

No muslim members have been exhibitng it. You guys don't give a damn about the evidence we post, you're more concerned with technicalities because you've got no other way of denying it without looking silly. You don't care how you reject evolution, as long as you reject it somehow. In science its the worst kind of practice, working towards an answer you know you need whilst ignoring deviations along the way.

 

[Ghostaka]

No muslim members have been exhibitng it. You guys don't give a damn about the evidence we post, you're more concerned with technicalities because you've got no other way of denying it without looking silly. You don't care how you reject evolution, as long as you reject it somehow. In science its the worst kind of practice, working towards an answer you know you need whilst ignoring deviations along the way.

You have just described the way you behave when looking at Islam or the Qur'an.

Peace be upon you.

 

[darkendless]

You have just described the way you behave when looking at Islam or the Qur'an.

Peace be upon you.

The Quran is not the same as science in any way shape or form.

Science is about emperical data and facts

The Quran is philosophical

Do you see the difference?

 

[Fatihah]

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.

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.[/QUOTE]

Response: Seems someone else has reduced their argument to playing with words. How on earth do you show something to be a fact without proof? That's what the word "proof" means. A fact is synonymous to truth and when you provide factual evidence to show whether something is is the truth, it's called "proof".

 

[Fatihah]

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

Response: When you start to claim that you've actually seen a species evolve into another in front of your own eyes, you've either reached a level of brainwashing so strong that either your sight has become delusional or your denial is so severe that you have to claim something you didn't see just to make yourself look good. When that's the case, it becomes very sad on your part and only makes you look extremely absurd, not the other way around.

 

[YmirGF]

The conclusions you are trying to draw from the present evidence of evolution cannot be used to deny that there is a Creator as some people here are attempting to do.

I was under the obviously mistaken impression that several members have insisted that this is NOT about god. The Theory of Evolution does not directly address any god concepts, period.

The only reason that God rears his pointy little head is because of Creationist tales outlined in several religions. Those creation myths DO fly in the face of the Theory of Evolution. Generally, most religions are less stridently opposed to ToE, however Islam is caught in a particularly delicate position of having its error free nature tarnished. This is the fault of Muslims and the creators of the Qur'an, not Darwin and the thousands of scientists all over the globe that both support and further Darwin's original work. It's the fault of Muslims who insist that their "Holy" Book is without error that makes it impossible for them to accept the Theory of Evolution.

This is because there are things that don't match up in ToE. Why do you think it is called a THEORY?

It is called a theory because it is not 100% proven to be correct. You could consider this to be a safety valve of a sorts for science to modify its position IN LIGHT OF CURRENT EVIDENCE. This is in stark contrast to religious writings that are unalterable and the believer is stuck with what they have been given. One belief system PROMOTES change; the other denies any possibility of change.

Why do I say this?

Because your intellect is seriously hamstrung by your religious convictions. Those religious convictions and deep-seated belief structures simply do not all for any possibility that those very belief structures are in error. This is why you cannot understand. It is like you have a veil over the eyes of your understanding. *giggle*

Because of the point/question I proposed earlier. Is there a genetic mutation every time a child is born to cause unique fingerprints? How does that work; especially since every single human being has a different one including TWINS.

Unlike Muslims with their abject certitude, I am quite comfortable saying, "Heck, I don't know!" More importantly - you don't know either. So...

What did I tell you about performing "drive-by"s?

Frankly, I just consider the source of such comments and move on. Muslims are so predicatable.

Can't anyone see what this person is doing? Every time there is a grand misunderstanding between Muslims and Athiests in a thread (like what just happended) you quickly come a long and try to destroy any form of agreement there was earlier in the discussion.

You misunderstand me. I am actually clarifying the muddy waters that the debators have quickly found themselves in. Many are not as familiar with Islam or the debate tactics of Muslims as I am.

But to be honest, there isn't much of a discussion going on here. Do you actually disagree with my assertion that this is about the inerrancy of the Qur'an rather than the errancy of the Theory of Evolution? THAT is the ONLY real reason that Muslims disagree with the Theory of Evolution, after all is said and done. It conflicts with the Qur'an and therefore - by default - MUST be wrong. No Muslim in this thread has actually poked any real holes in the Theory of Evolution because they are simply attacking their own misunderstand of what the Theory of Evolution is, basing their arguments of their own ignorance. That much is very plain and if, like Fatihah, you need evidence then simply review this thread and you will see what I am talking about.

Every thread has a similar comment from you YmirGF. I cannot stop thinking that you were serious about being here to merely "talk against Islam" as you yourself admitted. That is what sad is.

At least I am perfectly honest about it. Sue me.

 

[Autodidact]

The conclusions you are trying to draw from the present evidence of evolution cannot be used to deny that there is a Creator as some people here are attempting to do.

I agree completely, as I have now said 30 or 40 times in this thread. If you want to discuss atheism, start a thread, this one is about evolution.

This is because there are things that don't match up in ToE. Why do you think it is called a THEORY?

I'm pretty sure the scientific definition of a theory has been presented at least 5 times in this thread. Rather than parade your ignorance, I suggest you learn it. It's called a theory because it is one. That means it's the best explanation for an entire set of important observations that we have.

Why do I say this? Because of the point/question I proposed earlier. Is there a genetic mutation every time a child is born to cause unique fingerprints?How does that work; especially since every single human being has a different one including TWINS.

Fingerprints are roughly determined by genetics, but also influenced by the fetal environment. That's why twin's fingerprints are more similar than non-twins, but still not identical.

Think about it for a second. (This may come hard to you.) The world's smartest scientists spent almost 100 years challenging ToE with every idea they could come up with, and it passed every test. Do you really think you're going to come up with something new?

 

[Autodidact]

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]

EVIDENCE.

 

[Fatihah]

As a matter of fact it is in the dictionary:

a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>

Look it up here

You do know HOW to that - right?

Response: Amazing. You post the definition of "theory", read it, and still can't understand the meaning. Nowhere, even in the definition which you've provided, does it say that a "theory" is a fact. The word "fact" is not even there.

This alone holds as evidence of how a person is programmed. You've been programmed so severely that you can't even comprehend what you've read. How unfortunate it is.

 

[YmirGF]

Response: When you start to claim that you've actually seen a species evolve into another in front of your own eyes, you've either reached a level of brainwashing so strong that either your sight has become delusional or your denial is so severe that you have to claim something you didn't see just to make yourself look good.

Like Jayhawker, I am fascinating by the pathology of the person who makes such comments. You make it sound like people are telling you about pixie sightings.

When that's the case, it becomes very sad on your part and only makes you look extremely absurd, not the other way around.

Ok, I admit I am pretty used to you now, Fatihah. What puzzles me is can you, in turn, understand how utterly odd YOUR viewpoints look to us?

 

[Autodidact]

It does not invalidate my previous post.(End quote)

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.

Merriam-Webster:
Main Entry:the·o·ry Pronunciation: \&#712;th&#275;-&#601;-r&#275;, &#712;thir-&#275;\ Function:noun Inflected Form(s):plural the·o·riesEtymology:Late Latin theoria, from Greek the&#333;ria, from the&#333;reinDate:1592 1: the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another2: abstract thought : speculation3: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art <music theory>4 a: 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>6 a: 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>synonyms see hypothesis



[/quote]

Here is uncontrovertible evidence that Fatihah is wrong. I predict that he will not admit this, but continue to spew falsehoods, as is his habit.

 

[Autodidact]

Response: There's the statement. Where's the proof? When you consistantly make statements with absolutely know proof to back them up, it becomes painfully obvious why. Because in fact, atheist have a lot riding on the Theory to be right. This gives them more cushion to say that there is no God, despite the fact that their own proof doesn't back their belief up.

Don't worry, he wasn't talking to you. Oh, and you are the proof, Fatihah. We've all seen it in this thread.

 

[Autodidact]

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".

Correct. It's like germ theory or atomic theory. Evidence supports it, but can never prove it, and it can never be a fact. The evidence indicates that it's a correct explanation of how we get new species. And that's the best you're ever going to get from science. So you either accept science and how it works, or you reject this theory and science itself. Which is kind of hard to do on a computer.

 

[Autodidact]

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.

Yup. And if you accept scientific explanations based on facts, like the germ theory of disease, atomic theory, or electrical theory, then you should accept the Theory of Evolution as well. btw, (and I realize this is way too complicated for you) the Theory of Evolution explains the fact of evolution. That is, we know that species change over time--that is an undisputed fact--ToE explains how.

 

[Autodidact]

Have forgotten the definition of "critical analysis"? If that's not what we've been doing throughout this thread then I've been missing out!?!

Some of have. At least one has been doing "blind denial", which is kind of the opposite of critical analysis.

 

[Autodidact]

You have just described the way you behave when looking at Islam or the Qur'an.

Peace be upon you.

Start a thread please. This thread is not about Islam. Stop it right now.

 

[Autodidact]

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.

Response: Seems someone else has reduced their argument to playing with words. How on earth do you show something to be a fact without proof? That's what the word "proof" means. A fact is synonymous to truth and when you provide factual evidence to show whether something is is the truth, it's called "proof".[/quote]

EVIDENCE.

 

[Fatihah]

Like Jayhawker, I am fascinating by the pathology of the person who makes such comments. You make it sound like people are telling you about pixie sightings.

Ok, I admit I am pretty used to you now, Fatihah. What puzzles me is can you, in turn, understand how utterly odd YOUR viewpoints look to us?

Response: Of course I do. I understand it completely. You are an atheist who refuses to believe in God? Why? Because you can't see God. Understandible. But there are somethings which require sight for you to see as proof while others don't. Allah is one of them but you refuse to accept any evidence of it because you can't see him, despite the fact that you and I know that we both exists yet we can't see each other.

So you've held on to your belief of ToE, not because you've seen a species evolve into another yourself (if you are honest) but because scientists have said so. Science and scientists are reliable because science can be tested and proven. So when a scientists says that ToE is true, you rely on them as telling the truth, despite the fact that you've never seen it yourself.

Then when we add to the notion that you and atheist alike seem to think that all theists believe in the existence of God and the truth of their scripture simply because a book said so, you put all theist in a bubble despite the fact that not once have I resorted my argument to such things. There is a reason why I continuously say, "I see a statement. Where's the proof?" Because this same formula I use to you and others is the same I used to the qur'an. I don't believe blindly. In other words, just like science, muslims, do test the qur'an. But those test mean nothing to you because you refuse to take them and hold on to your belief of no Allah and ToE as truth. Thus the ongoing circle continues.