[ManifestDestiny]

EdwardRI EdwardRI:

Do you know what bacteria are? What about plasmids? Virii?
.

Ok so you believe we have evolved from a blob of goop?

[Biblesmasher]

Please Zeus almighty tell me we're not debating evolution on a Canadian site.

[Biblesmasher]

ManifestDestiny ManifestDestiny:

a growing list of scientists, including biochemists and geneticists, who have “dissented” from Darwinism and natural selection while the mainstreet media continues to report only “one side” of this very serious debate about man’s origins.

Please direct me to the link of this "list"

[Guy_Fawkes]

ManifestDestiny ManifestDestiny:

Guy_Fawkes Guy_Fawkes:

Evolution is on the diversity of life not the origin, that is abiogenisis.

Are you sure?
The origin of life is a necessary precursor for biological evolution!

Fail.

It is not necessary; evolution stands on its own without an explanation for the creation of life. It is just there to explain how life went from a specific ancestor to different species.

I will ask again, since you dont believe it, what theory (or law ) explains the diversity of life better than evolution?

[Guy_Fawkes]

Biblesmasher Biblesmasher:

ManifestDestiny ManifestDestiny:

a growing list of scientists, including biochemists and geneticists, who have “dissented” from Darwinism and natural selection while the mainstreet media continues to report only “one side” of this very serious debate about man’s origins.

Please direct me to the link of this "list"

Dont bother his list is from the Discovery Institute, a religious organization that completely endorses creation as scientific fact.

[Zipperfish]

ManifestDestiny ManifestDestiny:

Each of us has a vast ‘computer program’ of six billion DNA bases in every cell that guided our development from a fertilized egg, specifies how to make more than 200 tissue types, and ties all this together in numerous highly functional organ systems. Few people outside of genetics or biochemistry realize that evolutionists still can provide no substantive details at all about the origin of life, and particularly the origin of genetic information in the first self-replicating organism. What genes did it require – or did it even have genes? How much DNA and RNA did it have – or did it even have nucleic acids? How did huge information-rich molecules arise before natural selection? Exactly how did the genetic code linking nucleic acids to amino acid sequence originate? Clearly the origin of life – the foundation of evolution - is still virtually all speculation, and little if no fact.

It is not the purpose of the Theory of Evolution to describe the origin of life. Understanding of how life began is not a necessary precursor for some understanding how how life evolves.

[Biblesmasher]

Guy_Fawkes Guy_Fawkes:

Biblesmasher Biblesmasher:

ManifestDestiny ManifestDestiny:

a growing list of scientists, including biochemists and geneticists, who have “dissented” from Darwinism and natural selection while the mainstreet media continues to report only “one side” of this very serious debate about man’s origins.

Please direct me to the link of this "list"

Dont bother his list is from the Discovery Institute, a religious organization that completely endorses creation as scientific fact.

Wow. How depressing.

[Guy_Fawkes]

Please watch some of DonExodus2's videos, he is much much MUCH better at explaining this then I am.

[Biblesmasher]

Man, even the article itself is shady...referring to them as "scientists". And you'd think an article about science wouldn't use the casual speak "theory" to describe a hypothesis. Just feeds this "SEE? its just a THEORY!" idiocy.

[Biblesmasher]

Guy_Fawkes Guy_Fawkes:

Please watch some of DonExodus2's videos, he is much much MUCH better at explaining this then I am.

Meh, its commie propaganda. Evolution leads to gay sex.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Guy_Fawkes Guy_Fawkes:

Again let me hold up the Theory of Relativity, not a guess. It might not explain everything but its the best explanation we have at the moment. Science is fluid and is meant to be refined, if there was a better explanation of the diversity of life and the origin of species I would argue that, but there isnt.

And again parts of that Theory have been proven as far as we can tell for now, and parts of it still aren't proven. This statement you made right here:
"It might not explain everything but its the best explanation we have at the moment." totally contradicts your argument. The "best explanation we have at the moment" hardly constitutes scientific fact.

A theory, in the scientific sense of the word, is an analytic structure designed to explain a set of empirical observations. A scientific theory does two things:

1) it identifies this set of distinct observations as a class of phenomena, and 2) makes assertions about the underlying reality that brings about or affects this class.

Now let's look at assertions as proof.

Proof by assertion is a logical fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction. Sometimes this may be repeated until challenges dry up, at which point it is asserted as fact due to its not being contradicted. In other cases its repetition may be cited as evidence of its truth, in a variant of the appeal to authority or appeal to belief fallacies.

[Brenda]

$1:

Meh, its commie propaganda. Evolution leads to gay sex.

which leads to the end of mankind, which scientifically assumes Man is selfdestructive

(I am a scientist, see? )

[Guy_Fawkes]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Guy_Fawkes Guy_Fawkes:

Again let me hold up the Theory of Relativity, not a guess. It might not explain everything but its the best explanation we have at the moment. Science is fluid and is meant to be refined, if there was a better explanation of the diversity of life and the origin of species I would argue that, but there isnt.

And again parts of that Theory have been proven as far as we can tell for now, and parts of it still aren't proven. This statement you made right here:
"It might not explain everything but its the best explanation we have at the moment." totally contradicts your argument. The "best explanation we have at the moment" hardly constitutes scientific fact.

A theory, in the scientific sense of the word, is an analytic structure designed to explain a set of empirical observations. A scientific theory does two things:

1) it identifies this set of distinct observations as a class of phenomena, and 2) makes assertions about the underlying reality that brings about or affects this class.

Now let's look at assertions as proof.

Proof by assertion is a logical fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction. Sometimes this may be repeated until challenges dry up, at which point it is asserted as fact due to its not being contradicted. In other cases its repetition may be cited as evidence of its truth, in a variant of the appeal to authority or appeal to belief fallacies.

You just cant get past the word theory can you?
Show me some examples of evidence disproving evolution.

[Guy_Fawkes]

Here watch this, at least you will get a small basis of what evolution is!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpNeGuuu ... playnext=1

[GreenTiger]

IN PLanet of The Apes weren't the Oranutans the more intellectual of the ape types?