Forums → WEPR → Evolution
| 175 | 91193 |
- 175 Replies
There is no way for them to find out how old anything is exactly. Impossible.
Oh yes? Then what about carbon dating? Biostratigraphy? Molecular clock? We can literally read the time from geological layers:
I am open to learning if there's obvious proof.
The links provided in that link to the blog post I did that can also be found on my profile provides such "roof".
It's a theory, not a fact,
It's both fact and theory. But let's start with giving you a basic understanding of what these terms mean, since you don't seem to know what your talking about .
A theory isn't something one person just makes up. It requires multiple people to verify it with objective verifiable evidence. (i.e. proof) If a theory didn't have "roof, it wouldn't be a theory in the scientific sense in the first place.
Theory; A scientific explanation of related observations or events based on hypotheses and verified multiple times by different independent researchers.
There is no reason a theory cannot be an actual fact as well.
-The germ theory of desease: that some illnesses are caused by microscopic organisms.
-The heliocentric solar system: that the planets in our solar system orbit around the sun.
-The atomic theory of matter: that all matter is made up of atoms.
These are often not thought of as theories but as facts, and they are. But they also fit the definition of a theory as they offer explaination.
Fact; An objective, verifiable observation. They can be, and has been, verified many times.
so I'm not going to believe it unless you can show me complete proof.
That's a good attitude to take, I wish you would take the same approach with other things, but I digress. However the problem is we have presented you with evidence already and you seem to have ignored it.
Some scientist could've made up some random crap so people would call him a freakin genius.
Yes, and when other scientists come along and try to rip it to shreds or put it to use what those scientists just made up would fall apart like a house of cards. That's one of the nice things about science, it has a tendency to naturally weed out the false stuff over time if any get's in there.
Most of the science was started and advanced by the church, as well as music, art, and much mire.
Mean like how when someone proposed something like the Earth is round or we revolve around the sun religion readily accepted it based on the evidence and didn't treat those people as heretics?
The problem is religion uses a backwards method to that of science. As illustrated here.
Your picture showed that scientists took facts, and guessed what they meant.
Took the facts, proposed a hypothesis to explain them, tested their claims, had others test their claims, revised any inconsistencies, restested their claims, had others test those new claims, until everything added up.
Catholics have the meaning, and believe them because it's the word of God himself.
Except you don't have the conclusion. You have the conclusion, according to itself. Literally anyone can say something, and then say that what they just said is right.
You have no proof that the bible is the word of God.
You have no proof that the Islam isn't true instead.
You have no proof that a non-abrahamic religion isn't true instead.
You have no proof about anything, other than a self-affirming book.
And Kasic, I just made up the ridiculous number of 7000000 because its basically what they say
The numbers we find for ages are not random. They're based on logic and empirical evidence. We find testing various things to be consistent.
I'm emphasizing the stupidity
What you are doing is this.
Kasic, although you are the biggest troll
I'm not trolling.