What is a 'theory' ?

[Copernicus]

Richard Dawkins, in his book The Greatest Show on Earth, had an amusing take on the futility of arguing with creationist proponents of the "missing link" criticism. Scientists have been discovering transitional fossils (aka "missing links") for decades now, because there will always be gaps in the fossil record. Nobody expects otherwise. But every time someone discovers a new transitional fossil, that converts one gap into two, because there are now new gaps between the new transitional fossil and the older and newer fossils on either side of it. Paradoxically, the more "missing links" one discovers, the more gaps there are in the fossil record!

 

[Thief]

Richard Dawkins, in his book The Greatest Show on Earth, had an amusing take on the futility of arguing with creationist proponents of the "missing link" criticism. Scientists have been discovering transitional fossils (aka "missing links") for decades now, because there will always be gaps in the fossil record. Nobody expects otherwise. But every time someone discovers a new transitional fossil, that converts one gap into two, because there are now new gaps between the new transitional fossil and the older and newer fossils on either side of it. Paradoxically, the more "missing links" one discovers, the more gaps there are in the fossil record!

And this was mentioned a few days ago....by a scientist....
talking about the sudden divergence between Man and his primates.

But you already know my take on Adam and Eve.....don't you?

 

[Copernicus]

Another great point that Dawkins made about the 'theory' of evolution was how easy it would be to disprove it. All one would have to do is find, say, fossils of mammals in Devonian strata or fossils of humans in Jurassic strata. Each rock stratum contains a fixed set of known fossils and there are never any confirmed cases of mixtures. Not one. And new fossils are being discovered every day that confirm the theory. For reasons such as this, there is no scientific controversy over the theory of evolution. The debate is entirely political and religious.

 

[outhouse]

Another great point that Dawkins made about the 'theory' of evolution was how easy it would be to disprove it. All one would have to do is find, say, fossils of mammals in Devonian strata or fossils of humans in Jurassic strata. Each rock stratum contains a fixed set of known fossils and there are never any confirmed cases of mixtures. Not one. And new fossils are being discovered every day that confirm the theory. For reasons such as this, there is no scientific controversy over the theory of evolution. The debate is entirely political and religious.

So true on ever level.

there is no debate among scientist because its reality

not a myth like religion

 

[Thief]

Another great point that Dawkins made about the 'theory' of evolution was how easy it would be to disprove it. All one would have to do is find, say, fossils of mammals in Devonian strata or fossils of humans in Jurassic strata. Each rock stratum contains a fixed set of known fossils and there are never any confirmed cases of mixtures. Not one. And new fossils are being discovered every day that confirm the theory. For reasons such as this, there is no scientific controversy over the theory of evolution. The debate is entirely political and religious.

Granted.

I believe in evolution.
I also believe in God.

I can have both.

 

[Copernicus]

I can have both.

Have I said something to imply that you couldn't? Evolution is not an argument against the existence of God. It is an argument against belief that some intelligent agency designed nature to be the way it is.

 

[Thief]

Have I said something to imply that you couldn't? Evolution is not an argument against the existence of God. It is an argument against belief that some intelligent agency designed nature to be the way it is.

So there can be a God....without the ability to manipulate what He creates?

Seems a contradiction in terms.

 

[outhouse]

So there can be a God....without the ability to manipulate what He creates?

Seems a contradiction in terms.

you can have a god, who said he created anything.

so far I dont see any need to pull ole magic man in for anything.

nature has a clear path on its own without the help of any magic

 

[Copernicus]

So there can be a God....without the ability to manipulate what He creates?

Seems a contradiction in terms.

Sure. People can imagine many different versions of God. Christians, Muslims, and Jews do just that. However, they usually imagine a manipulative God, because a God that did not intervene in our lives (and our putative afterlives) would be somewhat worthless to them.

 

[Vansdad]

Granted.

I believe in evolution.
I also believe in God.

I can have both.

I believe this too. Even if we evolved from a single source who's to say it isn't God's plan. Creation isn't just Adam and Eve.

 

[Thief]

Okay...previous posts noted.....

but at what point does God come into the picture?

Before the singularity?...or after?

If you say before.....
Then God is the Creator...the source of all motion and substance.

If you say after....
Then God is not the Creator.

 

[outhouse]

Okay...previous posts noted.....

but at what point does God come into the picture?

Before the singularity?...or after?

If you say before.....
Then God is the Creator...the source of all motion and substance.

If you say after....
The God is not the Creator.

lets get this straight, your personal god ,,,,,, not everyone elses

only created the universe but nothing else??????

has the bar set in genesis been moved into fantasy land????

Pure imagination????

 

[Thief]

lets get this straight, your personal god ,,,,,, not everyone elses

only created the universe but nothing else??????

has the bar set in genesis been moved into fantasy land????

Pure imagination????

Only created the universe and nothing else??????

Do you ever listen to yourself type?

 

[outhouse]

Only created the universe and nothing else??????

Do you ever listen to yourself type?

Its your weird left field belief not mine.

magic man steps in and and says "poof" there it is" at your command

Ya ya I understand :areyoucra

 

[Copernicus]

Okay...previous posts noted.....
but at what point does God come into the picture?

If you were genuinely asking me, then my answer would be that he doesn't.

Before the singularity?...or after?
If you say before.....
Then God is the Creator...the source of all motion and substance.
If you say after....
Then God is not the Creator.

A lot of believers maintain that God exists outside of our time frame, but they, like you, cannot help but place him squarely inside of it so that he can play the interventionist role that their doctrines assign to him. A more likely scenario seems to be that whatever caused the big bang was something on the same order--inanimate forces. The universe is a very strange place, but it is a place in which intelligent beings seem to have evolved rather than been created out of whole cloth by a super-intelligent being.

 

[outhouse]

there is no god type figure there never has been in my opinion.

they state god made man in "OUR" image, it was really man made god in our image.

for 200,000 years when man could not come up with a rational answer to a question, you guessed it "god" did it.

its time to put he primitive myth behind us

 

[Thief]

If you were genuinely asking me, then my answer would be that he doesn't.

Your lack of faith is noted.

A lot of believers maintain that God exists outside of our time frame, but they, like you, cannot help but place him squarely inside of it so that he can play the interventionist role that their doctrines assign to him. A more likely scenario seems to be that whatever caused the big bang was something on the same order--inanimate forces. The universe is a very strange place, but it is a place in which intelligent beings seem to have evolved rather than been created out of whole cloth by a super-intelligent being.

Too much assumption and inappropriate association.

By this post you assume substance begets spirit?

 

[Copernicus]

Too much assumption and inappropriate association.

By this post you assume substance begets spirit?

I cannot answer that question until you explain what you mean by "substance" and "spirit". Physical brains almost certainly "beget" minds, but there is reason to believe that minds do not continue to exist after the brain ceases to function.

 

[gnostic]

I wish theists and literal creationists would learn what scientific theory is. Till they do, they would remain pig-headed ignorant in what theory really means in science. Using a dictionary doesn't really explain the true meaning in science.

The "theory" that creationists and theists tend to use, is actually hypothesis.

Hypothesis are explanation, speculation or prediction that have not being verified or tested. Those hypotheses that contradicted by the number of independent evidences available are discarded. Those hypotheses supported by evidences, have chance to developed into fully scientific theory.

In science, theory is explanation that used to explain the nature of the science, explain the evidences that have been found to correlate with theory and the theory's predictions, it explain the laws and the mathematical equations.

Without theory, it would be difficult for people to explain anything involved in science.

 

[Thief]

I cannot answer that question until you explain what you mean by "substance" and "spirit". Physical brains almost certainly "beget" minds, but there is reason to believe that minds do not continue to exist after the brain ceases to function.

You are then the sum of your chemistry.

When it fails...you fail.

Dust you are made of.....dust you will be.