storm1977 0 #26 November 9, 2004 See, we can put a frog in a controlled environment for long periods of time, and it may mutate or conform to its surroundings... But, say humans came from apes who came from dogs who came from dolphins is about as proovable as string theories 12 dimensions!!!! or was it 13? hmmm ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 236 #27 November 9, 2004 Are we not men? We are DEVO! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
favaks 0 #28 November 9, 2004 Evolution and natural selection are not the same. Natural selection is a theory that describes the evolution of life. There can be many theories trying to describe a particular evolution, and they can be wrong, but evolution itself is a fact. Quote But, say humans came from apes who came from dogs who came from dolphins is about as proovable as string theories 12 dimensions!!!! or was it 13? hmmm Natural selection does not say that we cam from apes, dogs, dolphins, and etc.. You sould read "The Selfish Genes" favaks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #29 November 9, 2004 QuoteEvolution and natural selection are not the same. Natural selection is a theory that describes the evolution of life. There can be many theories trying to describe a particular evolution, and it can be wrong, but evolution itself is a fact. Depends on if you're talking about macro or micro evolution, right? Again, I'm no expert but that goes back to what Storm1977 said. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #30 November 9, 2004 QuoteQuoteEvolution is a fact, just like gravity. Natural selection is a theory. favaks The evolution of Humans is not a fact is it. Evolution does happen in a controlled sample we know that, but Evolution on an interspecies scale is a theory. Natural Selection it also a theory. Quantum mechanics is a theory, as is relativity. Both have passed all tests that have been devised, but they are still theories. There's some absurd idea that calling something a theory implies it's defective somehow. Creationism, however, doesn't rise to the standard of being a theory. It's just faith.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #31 November 9, 2004 QuoteQuantum mechanics is a theory, as is relativity. Both have passed all tests that have been devised, but they are still theories. There's some absurd idea that calling something a theory implies it's defective somehow. Creationism, however, doesn't rise to the standard of being a theory. It's just faith. Ok, so you'd personally have no problem with this sticker being on your science textbook, right? "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
smiles 0 #32 November 9, 2004 Show the Creationsits a fossil series A to B to C and they will ask, 'what came between A and B? What came between B and C? Genesis is much more comforting. Believing, as many people do, that every word (or nearly every word) of the Bible is the literal word of God gives those believers a great deal of personal peace and joy. An excerpt from: National Geographic Mag. Nov. 2004- QuoteAccording to a Gallup poll drawn from more than a thousand telephone interviews conducted in February 2001, no less than 45 percent of responding U.S. adults agreed that "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so." Evolution, by their lights, played no role in shaping us. Only 37 percent of the polled Americans were satisfied with allowing room for both God and Darwin—that is, divine initiative to get things started, evolution as the creative means. (This view, according to more than one papal pronouncement, is compatible with Roman Catholic dogma.) Still fewer Americans, only 12 percent, believed that humans evolved from other life-forms without any involvement of a god. The most startling thing about these poll numbers is not that so many Americans reject evolution, but that the statistical breakdown hasn't changed much in two decades. Gallup interviewers posed exactly the same choices in 1982, 1993, 1997, and 1999. The creationist conviction—that God alone, and not evolution, produced humans—has never drawn less than 44 percent. In other words, nearly half the American populace prefers to believe that Charles Darwin was wrong where it mattered most. The American public certainly includes a large segment of scriptural literalists- but not that large, not 44 percent. Creationist proselytizers and political activists, working hard to interfere with the teaching of evolutionary biology in public schools, are another part. Honest confusion and ignorance, among millions of adult Americans, must still be another. Many people have never taken a biology course that dealt with evolution nor read a book in which the theory was lucidly explained. Today the same four branches of biological science from which Darwin drew- biogeography, paleontology, embryology, morphology- embrace an every growing body of supporting data. In addition to those categories we now have others: population genetics, biochemistry, molecular biology, and, most recently, the whiz-bang field of machine-driven genetic sequencing known as genomics. Reporting and analyzing the results of the Human Genome Project, Douglas Futuyma is a highly respected evolutionary biologist. “Science on Trial: The case for evolution” is one of his books. Modern genetics- the more recent issue of “Nature” is one devoted to the sequenced genome of the house mouse. The resemblance between our 30,000 human genes and those 30,000 mousy counterparts, represents another form of homology. Philip D. Gingerich is a well known paleontologist for his work on the ancestry of whales............... Pakicetus, a terrestrial mammal dating from 50 million years ago- ear bones reflect its membership in the whale lineage but whose skull looks doglike. Ambulocetus natans, (walking-and swimming whale) webbed feet, legs suitable for walking or swimming and a long toothy snout. Rodhecetus balochistanensis- fully a sea creature, its legs more like flippers, its nostrils shifted backward on the snout, halfway to the blowhole position on a modern whale. In the year 2000 a single piece of fossil changed the prevailing view in paleontology. A anklebone, from a four-legged whale was found dating back 47 million years. Molecular biologists--DNA hybridization and other tests—suggest that whales descended from artiodactyls (even-toed herbivores, such as antelopes and hippos.).......... SMiles Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #33 November 9, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuantum mechanics is a theory, as is relativity. Both have passed all tests that have been devised, but they are still theories. There's some absurd idea that calling something a theory implies it's defective somehow. Creationism, however, doesn't rise to the standard of being a theory. It's just faith. Ok, so you'd personally have no problem with this sticker being on your science textbook, right? "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered." No, I see nothing wrong with that. Well, it's a little silly to put it on a sticker on the outside like it's a warning label. Could just include it in the text. But if you're getting at the court case, I think it's silly to fight it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #34 November 9, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuantum mechanics is a theory, as is relativity. Both have passed all tests that have been devised, but they are still theories. There's some absurd idea that calling something a theory implies it's defective somehow. Creationism, however, doesn't rise to the standard of being a theory. It's just faith. Ok, so you'd personally have no problem with this sticker being on your science textbook, right? "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered." Not at all, just so long as quantum mechanics and relativity and kinetic theory of gases and continuum mechanics and thermodynamics had similar warning stickers. Shouldn't just pick on any one theory.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AMax 0 #35 November 9, 2004 Materialism is bullsh!t Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeordieSkydiver 0 #36 November 9, 2004 The theory that we evolved over millions of years from single cell organisms, with some evidence to back this up, makes more sense to me than the theory that some dude went "SHAAAZZZAAAMMM" then took a day off, even if there is a book about it. LeeLee _______________________________ In a world full of people, only some want to fly, is that not crazy? http://www.ukskydiver.co.uk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #37 November 9, 2004 >Evolution on an interspecies scale is a theory. As much as special relativity is a theory. >Natural Selection it also a theory. See above. There are a lot of theories out there; it would not serve you well to declare "I do not believe in the theory of special relativity, and therefore nuclear weapons do not work" if you were working on nuclear disarmament. We have seen nuclear weapons work; we have seen evolution work. You can believe whatever you want (of course) but in terms of science, the theory that best fits the observable facts, and is consistent with the rest of the body of science, is the one you can put money on. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nightingale 0 #38 November 9, 2004 QuoteEvolution is a fact, just like gravity. favaks um...no. evolution is a theory, and a theory doesn't become a fact. Also, gravity isn't a fact, it's a law. To a scientist a theory is a conceptual framework that explains existing observations and predicts new ones. The current consensus among philosophers of science seems to be this: * Laws are generalizations about what has happened, from which we can generalize about what we expect to happen. They pertain to observational data. The ability of the ancients to predict eclipses had nothing to do with whether they knew just how they happened; they had a law but not a theory. * Theories are explanations of observations (or of laws). The fact that we have a pretty good understanding of how stars explode doesn't necessarily mean we could predict the next supernova; we have a theory but not a law. William McComus (Science Prof, USC) lists gravity as a modern example of a well-established law for which no really satisfying theory is available. We can use the Law of Gravity, and even correct it for the effects of relativity (General Relativity), but we don't have any consensus notion of how it functions! Is it geometry or gravitons? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AMax 0 #39 November 9, 2004 Genetic conservation from warms to humans is one of the best evidences of interspecies evolution. On the other hand, we do not have any clear facts that would explain appearance of mind. Humans wonder and that's what makes us different from primates - our closest genetic relatives. Every time I ask my colleagues this question, I never get a clear logical answer. Well perhaps people who do not work in neuroscience field know better. And by the way, materialism is bullshit is a quote from one of the top Russian nuclear and rocket scientist. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #40 November 9, 2004 The only myth here is the one you're propogating. There is no mandate for a total separation of church and state. Do some research. One line, out of context, from a man's letter is hardly required doctrine for the nation. That said, I think it harms children to keep theories from them. They should be exposed, abeit carefully, to as many points of view as possible.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,563 #41 November 10, 2004 QuoteBut, say humans came from apes who came from dogs who came from dolphins is about as proovable as string theories 12 dimensions!!!! or was it 13? hmmm Woah, you really don't understand Darwin, do you?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IanHarrop 42 #42 November 10, 2004 Quote Speaks a lot for the "separation of church and state" myth. I said it was a myth. It is. Unless your reading into my statement that somehow it is not a myth."Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #43 November 10, 2004 QuoteWoah, you really don't understand Darwin, do you? Sure, he's that guy in the kids' books that wears round glasses and has a striped shirt and you have to find him in the crowd. No, wait, that's the tiger on the cereal box. no... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #44 November 10, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuantum mechanics is a theory, as is relativity. Both have passed all tests that have been devised, but they are still theories. There's some absurd idea that calling something a theory implies it's defective somehow. Creationism, however, doesn't rise to the standard of being a theory. It's just faith. Ok, so you'd personally have no problem with this sticker being on your science textbook, right? "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered." Not at all, just so long as quantum mechanics and relativity and kinetic theory of gases and continuum mechanics and thermodynamics had similar warning stickers. Shouldn't just pick on any one theory. obviously you cant expect religious fundamentalists to learn enough about science and understand the definition of a theory. "after all, theories are damn dangerous things, we had better be sure to warn everyone before they about to read one, that way i figure they'd have time to stick their fingers in their ears and start the ritual chanting....." maybe we should put warning labels on myths too, as they are equally dangerous. We can start with a mythos sticker for the Bible.....____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #45 November 10, 2004 QuoteJust out of curiosity, does anyone know what they teach about dinosaurs or geology? They tell people to ignore anything that looks like it's older than 6,000 years. Personally, I think creationism is absurd. -Jeffrey-Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #46 November 10, 2004 QuoteQuoteHmm, does that make the search for, and acquisition of fossils, and similar products of that era a religious mission? Oil for example...... Nacmac, you're evil and sneaky. That can be attractive in a guy Wendy W. That's what a lot of girls say when they pass over the average, "nice" guys. And then when the evil sneaky guy fucks them over, treats them like shit, cheats on them, suddenly they call him an asshole and lump all guys with him. -Jeffrey-Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonto 1 #47 November 10, 2004 I'm with you on that. tIt's the year of the Pig. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #48 November 10, 2004 Quotewhen I was taught evolution in school, it was taught as "this is the best theory we have right now. It is currently the only explanation that fits all the evidence, but like any scientific theory, it is under constant scrutiny and will be revised or dismissed in the face of new evidence." How did I end up going to a school that did not have any significant problems with: -violence -drugs -pregnancy -dropouts -controversial curricula ??? I remember we were taught evolution as the prevailing explanation for the state of the world's species, and creationism was, it was taught to us, another view that is held by religious people but is not viewed by academia as being likely to be true, given the evidence. No one ever had cause, it seemed, to freak out about the tenor of how this stuff was presented to students. -Jeffrey-Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #49 November 10, 2004 Nacmac, you're evil and sneaky. That can be attractive in a guy Wendy W. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That's what a lot of girls say when they pass over the average, "nice" guys. And then when the evil sneaky guy fucks them over, treats them like shit, cheats on them, suddenly they call him an asshole and lump all guys with him." You need to go out and get laid more, or maybe even just get laid. I can understand why nice gals would lump 'nice guys' like you with all the other assholes.-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #50 November 10, 2004 QuoteOk, so you'd personally have no problem with this sticker being on your science textbook, right? "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered." The problem I have with that disclaimer is that we know exactly why the religious fundamentalists want it in there: it's to plant the suggestion that we really ought to be considering creationism as an alternative explanation for life on earth. Why is THIS theory singled out, from all others taught in schools, for a disclaimer that "it's only a theory"? It's because this is a CAMPAIGN, not information. A CAMPAIGN by religious fundamentalists to work up support for creationism and to erode belief in evolutionary theory. If this wasn't so clearly about working an agenda, there would be less to object to about this disclaimer. -Jeffrey-Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
