I know this is WAY off topic, but since when was evolution 'proven'??? It's still just a theory coughloadofcrapcoug. Anyway, I'm not atheist, and I think my brain would try kill itself if I believed in some of the crap you guys do.
36 comments
It has been proved, more or less, since transitional fossiles were found, since DNA tests were made,.............want to know more?
Transitional fossils, DNA showing how close each species is related to each other, new bacteria evolving, etc, etc, etc. None of which you'll accept because your screwed up version of Christianity won't allow you to look at the evidence objectively.
I'm no expert, but I gather one thing that constitutes proof of evolution is that patterns can be deduced from existing fossil evidence and observations of exising species, and then new specimens are discovered outside the range of the previous results that fit the predicted model, much the same way that Mendeleyev's periodic table predicted the existence of certain as-yet undiscovered elements that, when subsequently isolated and examined, had properties that fitted into it perfectly. Fundies would probably argue that these aren't "real" experiments since they don't look like a stereotypical laboratory test with bubbling retorts and zappy jacob's ladders and stuff, but they do fit the definition of scientifically verifiable and repeatable results.
Result repitition and verification occur whenever a new type of specimen is discovered that fits the model extrapolated from previous data. The fact that the evolution is not actually observed in real time at the time of discovery of, say, a new fossil, also leads some people to conclude that it isn't really a valid experiment, but this is not the case - it's just as valid as if, say, you were to observe a scientific experiment in another galaxy via a very powerful telescope. You'd only get the results long after the experiment was over, due to the finite speed of light reaching you from that distance, but you could perform calculations and produce hypotheses from the results you observed just the same as if they were performed only five minutes ago and a metre in front of you. If a second set of results arrive five more minutes after you create this hypothesis and agree with it it, then you're well on the way to formulating a scientific law, even if the event that produced those results that arrived in five minutes took place years earlier.
In short, while it is true we can't demonstrate our model straight from molecules to sentient life right now, as the fundies so often demand, (because, obviously, the timescales are just impossible), the discovery of new examples of its various stages, accurately dated using accepted scientific techniques (rather like frames in a reel of film which can then be played fast enough that the full transition can be observed in a realistic timeframe, if we want to make our analogies as simplistic and obvious as possible) constitutes just as valid a demonstration.
I don't think anyone can make it any clearer than this, but I welcome correction or improvement.
There is a huge gulf between 'believing in' something, and accepting a premise on its own strength.
Evolution is not a belief system. Nothing to break your brain over.
The fly in the ointment is the fact that nobody has been able to observe, or duplicate, or even uncover material evidence of autobiogenesis, especially at the higher levels of complexity that H. Sapiens exhibits.
"Goddidit" is merely a placeholder for a more complex chain of events.
My feeling is that the "Infinite Radiant IS" started the whole universe thing rolling, and the possibilities for life and everything were encoded into all matter and energy at the microscopic level.
Taken metaphorically, of course, any of us could squeeze and knead the above statement to say that it happened either way -- creation or evolution.
I BELIEVE that stars are the only true life forms. We organic things are no more than a colony of bacteria behind the toilet.
How's yer brain feeling now, Aggie?
Secretly we believe that a beared guy on a cloud created the universe on a whim.
Don't you love 201284? They demand evidence. You give them the evidence (which is more than they ever do). And the response is, "Duuh, you made that up."
Its proven every day in labs. Yes, you have to learn a few things, and look through a microscope for a few days (we all admit that it requires some learning first, but its worth it), but anyone willing to actually sit down and learn how can even see it at work once they know what they're looking for. People have tried to disprove it constantly: something sticking in the face of what you might've been hoping would be just a stupid thought is what science is all about.
There's a lot of stuff we wouldn't have if we didn't have a comprehensive understanding of it, or if it didn't work.
Vaccines, for example, wouldn't be much use, yet they're probably the most successful medical advance in history. Well, second to "OH! so the leeches don't actually suck demons out and heal you!"
Another great example is purebred dogs, and how most of their congenital 'issues' (german shepards with bad hips for example) dissapear when mixed with other races. a 'mongrel' will usually be far healthier. This and coat color may not seem like much, and in fact they aren't really, but consider hundreds, thousands of generations with minor changes like this, and that's evolution at work right there... (very artificially/directly hampered by human effort till fluffy escapes from the yard for a day or two and comes back pregnant).
Evolution is "just a theory," kind of like how the Mona Lisa is "just a painting."
It's technically true, but only someone who doesn't understand how theories (or paintings) come about would actually word it that way.
I sure am tired of hearing/reading that line about the ToE being just a theory. It IS a theory, but a scientific theory is not a guess, a lark, non-supported assertion. a conjecture, etc.. In fact, this particular theory is so very well supported that, while the exact mechanisms of evolution are debated, evolution is as close to a fact as one can get in science.
Wow, you actually believe you have a brain...
Yes, I know it's mean, but this is a very, very tired argument and I've run out of patience with imbeciles.
Evolution has been proven for much longer than you've been alive. And yeah, it's a "theory" but you don't know what that means in scientific terms.
And I would hazard a guess that your brain is already as dead as it can be without you going into a vegetative state.
"...and I think my brain would try kill itself if I believed in some of the crap you guys do."
Right back at you, Moronicus.
This being the fundamental problem with fundamental religion; faith trumps evidence, no proof is superior to truth, unsubstantated stories are accepted blindly over facts.
Your brain is already at war with itself. You'll use logic when mowing your lawn or preparing a meal but when it comes to your concept of why things are or what lifes about you've illogically accepted ancient fables over accumilated knowledge.
You've abadoned conventional and practicle wisdom and experience to blindly accept a myth. Your developed logic is corrupted by this unfounded belief and can spill over to corrupt your understanding of other concepts, hence; the slippery slope arguments fundies are continually harping;
If we let gays marry then everyone will be gay
Universal health care will make us 1970s Russia
Morals will vanish without religion
and other such illogical bullshit.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.