How does a easily recognizable increase in antibiotic resistant bacteria since the introduction on antibiotics, which is what the theory of evolution would predict, count as either rocks or sticks?
@Drace I'm confused by that statement. The theory of evolution is one of the many laws governing nature. That doesn't make it any less valid. Are you referring to the fact that we don't know everything, which I'd agree is also true. I'm just not quite sure what you're trying to say.
That's true, however it's a possibility that we're around 99.9999% is the correct possibility which is why other ideas need to have a lot of evidence not only supporting them (which isn't the case of creationism) but also disproving evolution (which has yet to happen). It's only logical to say that if this is what we think is happening, and everything we've seen shows that this is happening, and everything that we've tried has demonstrated that this is happening, then this is in fact happening. I heard someone say something along the line of "we don't actually know that gravity is a force, it may actually be something that looks just like gravity and behaves just like gravity, except that it isn't, but in the end it doesn't really matter because it does the exact same thing" which I think is relevant to the topic at hand.
That's true, however it's a possibility that we're around 99.9999%
Not even close. For one, there is a billion possibilities. Evolution only seems powerful because its been developed on. It seemed as an exceptional theory. It was fascinating actually. So people worked on it. Any evidence was found they made it fit into the theory. The theory got lucky, because apparently there cant even be anything major to prove it false.
If the facts Darwin found were a bit different, the theory of evolution would not be the same.
Hopefully you understand what the hell I'm saying.
I think I get it now, but I'm still not entirely sure XD.
Are you saying that there could be an infinite number of theories any of which could be correct with the right evidence to back it up?
My impression of the theory of evolution, along with most other scientific theories is that it's presented, and either accepted or rejected based on evidence gathered. In the case of the theory of evolution it was presented and since then it has undergone revisions based on new understandings and what we've learned since then. It's a powerful theory since it's been developed so much because all that development has led to it being tweaked to make it closer and closer to the truth. Not that the evidence has been changed to match the theory, but rather the theory has been changed to match the evidence. Since all of this has happened it would take something major to disprove it in it's entirety, but it might not take something major to alter it because that's how science works.
Are you saying that there could be an infinite number of theories any of which could be correct with the right evidence to back it up?
Exactly :P
The rest of what you said goes here
Hmm, yes I suppose, but either way evolution seems fallacious because of it. Apparently, we are not close to knowing everything. So the theory just has to make sense with the current data. If more data is found, theory changes a bit to fit. Now evolution is a pretty general theory, so what evidence can prove it wrong?
I can probably think of another explanation as an alternative to evolution. Kinda funny how no one thought of this theory until Darwin eh? Just goes toward to show my point.
@Drace I love that, "The rest of what you said goes here", just made me crack up for some reason, thanks!
mm, yes I suppose, but either way evolution seems fallacious because of it. Apparently, we are not close to knowing everything. So the theory just has to make sense with the current data. If more data is found, theory changes a bit to fit. Now evolution is a pretty general theory, so what evidence can prove it wrong?
This is actually a big problem some people seem to have with the sciences in that we're not giving the truth all the time, we're just giving it our best guess at the moment. Honestly, I personally see it as a strength, when you can recognize a mistake and correct it rather then just hoping it will go away that's a good thing in my opinion, but to each his own.
Kinda funny how no one thought of this theory until Darwin eh? Just goes toward to show my point.
Well to be fair there are a lot of things that seem a little off about everything that we've discovered, but that's just because we're looking at it from the perspective of people who have lived their whole lives with these ideas already out in the open. I mean, when Newton first 'discovered' gravity you can't really call it a discovery. He just gave a name to an existing phenomena and observed a set of rules governing it so that we could better understand it which is basically what Darwin did with evolution.
Just trying to say that when you think of something, it comes to you. So if I were to look for an alternative theory, I would find it.
By all means go ahead, if it sounds reasonable and has evidence supporting it then I'll be happy to listen to your alternative theory. Until that point though I will support the theory of evolution.
Evolution is Fake!! If Evolution was real Monkeys would still be involing and soo ould sea-weed. Sooo there has to be a God. ANd hos name is Jesus Christ!
I really have nothing against evolution though. It sounds skeptical to me though. I'm pretty sure the truth is actually far from evolution. Similar though.
Since we don't know everything, one can only assume. When assumptions build up, they become weaker. Break one and they all fall down.
