here we disprove evelotion(i think i misspelld it) an evelotioninist can come and defen himself so here we go.and you know wat i can disprove it with one fact. the odds of pepole evolving is somthig like 1 in 10 to the 1000 power oh and scientist only consiter an event with the posibilaty of 1 in 10 to the 50 power wich means it cant happen
Nothing is certain in this world. Evolution, creationism, the big bang, gravity.
FIRST!!!
Oh wait...well. If you deny some very basic postulates, like x=x, x or not x, not x and not x; stuff like that...then you can make that claim. But if you accept any of these postulates to be absolute, that means that there is certainty...
but I know you guys will try to prove me wrong.
Well, yeah - we would be irresponsible WEPR'ers if we didn't.
Nothing is certain in this world. Evolution, creationism, the big bang, gravity.
You obviously haven't read all of my posts that I have put in the WEPR forum. I have said the same thing before. I even made a really crappy thread that bombed on the subject.
NOTHING CAN BE PROVEN. it can be hypothesized very very very very convincingly, and "roven" by others, but it is all based on our limited knowledge of the universe and how we see it.
i mean... i swear you see the same things over and over and over again. Evolution doesn't disprove God.... if you think of it as a means by which he acted. I've posted on this before... and i really don't want to go back to that again...
the argument then becomes science can stand a part from God and if he isn't necessary then you can't prove he exists... and the other argument is that probabilities are very low for all of this to have occurred w/o a guiding hand (mutations and such).... and the argument for that is doesn't matter... if anything happened it would have the same probability so that argument isn't very good... all you can truly say is that "it happened" since we didn't know... and then the "yea huh" "nuh uh" "yeah huh" "nuh uh" argument starts...
You obviously haven't read all of my posts that I have put in the WEPR forum. I have said the same thing before. I even made a really crappy thread that bombed on the subject.
NOTHING CAN BE PROVEN. it can be hypothesized very very very very convincingly, and "roven" by others, but it is all based on our limited knowledge of the universe and how we see it.
I said you would quote it, not disagree with me. Anyway, I agree with you 100%, especially the last part.
Kevin - your last post is what you should have made your thread on!!!
I'd have participated...
I can still make one, but valkery already made one.
How does this prove evolution? It proves that our diets are better than they were 200 years ago, and that since they are better, we now have more musculature and brain capacity, but it in no way proves evolution at all.
Evolution is the changes of allele frequencies in a population over generations. Changes such as these while subtle are the result of these changes in our DNA.
Nothing is certain in this world. Evolution, creationism, the big bang, gravity.
I wouldn't say there is any absolute certainty, but we can have degrees of certainty. The things that have objective evidence, that can be independently observed and still arrive at the same result has a greater certainty then something that relies on personal experience and faith.
Evolution doesn't disprove God.
Nope it doesn't, but it does put into question the claims of various holy text.
i remember that from first semester freshman year ... i guess it depends on what kind of evolution you're talking about... introducing the pGlow gene or whatever its called isn't a natural phenomena is it? its introducing dna via viruses into the E. Coli so that the little buggers now have the phosphorescent gene in their genome so therefore they produce the glowing proteins that it codes for... and it also makes them somewhat resistant/immune to the uv light b/c of the glowing properties...
that's like introducing those traits via an outside power's desire to have them there right? ...but then its also showing that a genome isn't static... but dynamic and that new traits do arise. I'm not sure that particular argument kills "God".... so much as it does the classical anti-evolutionist's views..
the little glowy circles were pretty neat when i looked at them... the Drosophila Melonagaster experiments were just as cool
Heres the thing elevotion its whats for dinner many try to disporove the fact as a way to prove religion judao-christian most often but realy the point of the creation stories are to show religios truths god is good, god made the world good, god made made man in his spirtiuall imige religion and science can live together so just give it up zack
NOTHING CAN BE PROVEN. it can be hypothesized very very very very convincingly, and "roven" by others, but it is all based on our limited knowledge of the universe and how we see it.
It's true, nothing can be proven. The only thing you can know for sure is real is yourself, but then again...
Anyway, science and religion can indeed coexist, but religion has to make far more concessions to science than science does to religion.
It can, but I don't want it to. What will science get from religion? Nothing. Religion will only stop the awesomeness of science.
It can, but I don't want it to. What will science get from religion? Nothing. Religion will only stop the awesomeness of science.
... ...Science is all about proving what IS real, and using those concepts to further the process...
IF religion is real (which currently has absolutely no support but a bunch of thousands of year old texts that have been ripped apart by modern science) then we will indeed have learned something. Finding out in a definitive manner that there IS some sort of god would be quite the thing. I don't believe there is one though.
@loloynage2... i'm not seeing what you're trying to disagree w/ here... its like you said "NO ITS NOT!" and then agreed w/ it via different words then what he said..
science proved that the possibilities of those things are real... and is now furthering those concepts.
