McBell
Unbound
that is most likely because the vast majority of the evidence supports it.
Of course, I am talking about scientific evidence, not the nonsense that creations claim as evidence.
-
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!
The ToE and common ancestry of all life forms did not come from looking at the evidence
- Thread starter Man of Faith
- Start date
Of course, I am talking about scientific evidence, not the nonsense that creations claim as evidence.
OmarKhayyam
Well-Known Member
And you, I bet my next check on it, you are very sure of the Germ Theory of Disease. As evidenced by the presence of disinfectants in your bathroom.
And I'll make a second bet. You personally have never seen a bacteria of any kind. The only evidence you have is what you have told by ungodly science.
Yet you believe it.
ragordon168
Active Member
And you, I bet my next check on it, you are very sure of the Germ Theory of Disease. As evidenced by the presence of disinfectants in your bathroom.
And I'll make a second bet. You personally have never seen a bacteria of any kind. The only evidence you have is what you have told by ungodly science.
Yet you believe it.
bacteria? whats that?
illness is caused by malign spirits inhabiting various parts of your body.
head ache - one in your head, cough - one in your chest, strange burning 'down' there - well thats your own fault for having sex, it wouldnt have happend if you were married.
so when do you send me your check?
MSizer
MSizer
bacteria? whats that?
illness is caused by malign spirits inhabiting various parts of your body.
head ache - one in your head, cough - one in your chest, strange burning 'down' there - well thats your own fault for having sex, it wouldnt have happend if you were married.
so when do you send me your check?
You mean all this time I've been stressing over zoological nomenclature and algebraic equations to explain predator prey life cycles and all that other stuff, but it's really just as simple as we thought it was 400 years ago? Man, am I a fool for wasting my time and effort at school. I mean, that 6 tine branch with a little pac man ghost at the base makes so much more sense than that ridiculously complicated wheel graph autodidact posted. Geez, I feel like such a fool. Excuse me, I have a headache from all of that unnecessarily complicated stuff autodidact was saying. I'm going to go find a drill.
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
Yes, science allows us to be pretty sure of some things.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
richardlowellt
Well-Known Member
Self centered, self absorbed, delusional, and quite possibly just a little mentally unstable.
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
O.K., so far ToE has made two huge correct predictions, one of which is actually millions of sub-predictions, all of them confirmed. the Hypothesis of Kinds (HoK) has yet to be formulated in clear enough terms to generate a single prediction. (And they wonder why this doesn't get taught as science.)
Third huge, multi-part prediction.
You'll remember what ToE says about how we get new species, genii, families, etc. They always branch off from existing species, starting with the traits of the species they're branching from. If this is true, then every species on earth should be classified logically as a giant tree, with a single originating trunk, dividing into a few major limbs, them into larger branches, smaller branches, twigs, etc., and then millions of species, each and every one of which branches off from a twig above it. This would have to be the only possible classification system, and every species, without exception, would have to fit on it.
We should never see a species off by itself, sort of isolated, without any traits inherited from the species it branched off from.
Since species go extinct (under the ToE, although I didn't cover this, it is a very important piece of the theory) most of the trunk, larger limbs and branches will also be extinct, with most of what we see today as leaves on the very outside of the tree. When we find fossils of extinct species, we should be able to fit them farther up on a branch, and we should be able to see, in most cases, that they have more modern species as smaller branches coming out from them.
This cannot be arbitrary, but must be a true and accurate way to classify all living things, a "nested hierarchy". What I mean by an objective way to classify things, is that if you have an X that is descended from a Y, it should have all the traits of the Y that it inherited, possibly some in vestigial form, plus new traits. Then if Z descends from X, it should have everything X has, possibly in vestigial form, plus some new traits. And so forth.
For example, the only invertebrate that has evolved wings are insects. All insects have 3 body parts and 6 legs, because their ancestral species happened to. So if you tell me that scientists discovered a new flying invertebrate, I can predict that it will have 3 body parts and 6 legs, without ever having seen it. ToE allows us to make these kind of bold, specific predictions.
So, is it in fact the case that all of life is organized into a single nested hierarchy?
This single piece of evidence alone obliterates the "kind" hypothesis. It's not a forest of unrelated trees, but one single unified tree, evidence of the common ancestry of all living things.
This piece of evidence (or rather, millions of pieces) alone is persuasive that ToE is correct, but we will see there is much, much, more.
Third huge, multi-part prediction.
You'll remember what ToE says about how we get new species, genii, families, etc. They always branch off from existing species, starting with the traits of the species they're branching from. If this is true, then every species on earth should be classified logically as a giant tree, with a single originating trunk, dividing into a few major limbs, them into larger branches, smaller branches, twigs, etc., and then millions of species, each and every one of which branches off from a twig above it. This would have to be the only possible classification system, and every species, without exception, would have to fit on it.
We should never see a species off by itself, sort of isolated, without any traits inherited from the species it branched off from.
Since species go extinct (under the ToE, although I didn't cover this, it is a very important piece of the theory) most of the trunk, larger limbs and branches will also be extinct, with most of what we see today as leaves on the very outside of the tree. When we find fossils of extinct species, we should be able to fit them farther up on a branch, and we should be able to see, in most cases, that they have more modern species as smaller branches coming out from them.
This cannot be arbitrary, but must be a true and accurate way to classify all living things, a "nested hierarchy". What I mean by an objective way to classify things, is that if you have an X that is descended from a Y, it should have all the traits of the Y that it inherited, possibly some in vestigial form, plus new traits. Then if Z descends from X, it should have everything X has, possibly in vestigial form, plus some new traits. And so forth.
For example, the only invertebrate that has evolved wings are insects. All insects have 3 body parts and 6 legs, because their ancestral species happened to. So if you tell me that scientists discovered a new flying invertebrate, I can predict that it will have 3 body parts and 6 legs, without ever having seen it. ToE allows us to make these kind of bold, specific predictions.
So, is it in fact the case that all of life is organized into a single nested hierarchy?
This single piece of evidence alone obliterates the "kind" hypothesis. It's not a forest of unrelated trees, but one single unified tree, evidence of the common ancestry of all living things.
This piece of evidence (or rather, millions of pieces) alone is persuasive that ToE is correct, but we will see there is much, much, more.
richardlowellt
Well-Known Member
Please remember that many times sarcasm can be taken as serious especially when dealing with those who have no belief in science or the naturalistic realm, I have fallen into that a few times.bacteria? whats that?
illness is caused by malign spirits inhabiting various parts of your body.
head ache - one in your head, cough - one in your chest, strange burning 'down' there - well thats your own fault for having sex, it wouldnt have happend if you were married.
so when do you send me your check?
MSizer
MSizer
You mean just like you "destroyed" modern zoological nomenclature with the 6 tine branch based with a little pac man ghost? Why didn't you go straight to that in the first place then?
Btw, my geology is much stronger than my biology, so I'm looking forward to it.
Last edited:
MSizer
MSizer
You know that in order to "destroy" radio dating, you're going to have to pull the rug right out from under basic chemistry, right? Have you thought about the magnitude of the implication that would have? If you were to prove radio-dating incorrect, you would literaly turn all of science completely upside down. Literally. Good luck with that.
Gunfingers
Happiness Incarnate
Anyone else getting the impression that our legs are being pulled about this whole "destroy raiometric dating" thing?
MSizer
MSizer
Well, since MoF is taking so long, maybe I'll start a thread for him. I'll start by giving my quick explanation of how it works, and then we can let him rip it apart. I don't want to derail this one.
misanthropic_clown
Active Member
Ha. A little late.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Evangelical comic books don't count as "scientific sources."
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
Any thread with more than about 20 post has already been destroyed. Eventually someone will mention Hitler and then it needs to be terminated.
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
I see. The wheel is turning...
Concentrate... concentrate...
Sorry...but I have to say that's a cool Ubuntu symbol..
Viva Linux....
I digressed...sorry...
nonbeliever_92
Well-Known Member
It's more like the wheel is turning but the hamster is dead type of deal.
richardlowellt
Well-Known Member
And what's wrong with the mention of Hitler, he was close minded and fanatical just like so many of those of the Abrahamic religions that post here, in many cases I find it an apt comparison.
nonbeliever_92
Well-Known Member
Hey, MoF, like my avatar?