View Poll Results: Do you reject evolution?

Voters
127. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    7 5.51%
  • No

    120 94.49%
Page 18 of 25 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 243

Thread: Do you reject evolution?

  1. #171
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,897
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Do you reject evolution?

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Tell them all to stop using the word random, every university in the Western world. Why are you on about this?
    Because the way the word "random" is being used is inaccurate. It is being used in such a way as to imply that (in this case) mutations happen for absolutely no reason when that is the farthest thing from the truth. Everything happens for a reason. Just because we cannot identify that reason with mechanical/electronic instruments does not mean it does not exist. It also assumes that we know all that we can possibly know. Which if that was the case then Evolution would not be considered a theory. It would be considered as a Law of fact.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  2. #172
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,445

    Re: Do you reject evolution?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Because the way the word "random" is being used is inaccurate. It is being used in such a way as to imply that (in this case) mutations happen for absolutely no reason when that is the farthest thing from the truth. Everything happens for a reason. Just because we cannot identify that reason with mechanical/electronic instruments does not mean it does not exist. It also assumes that we know all that we can possibly know. Which if that was the case then Evolution would not be considered a theory. It would be considered as a Law of fact.

    Aliens

  3. #173
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,073

    Re: Do you reject evolution?

    I took this question as just how the other thread (that I'm betting was the inspiration for this) said it was asked or at least how it was answered, "humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time". I absolutely accept that Evolution happens and that we nor other species have existed just as we are throughout time. In fact, I am part of the proof that Evolution exists. I have no wisdom teeth and never will because it is one of those things that we are losing through evolution. We don't need them so they are evolving away.

    As for the other things people have brought up, it is wrong to limit theories of evolution to just those that you agree with. That isn't even what was asked. The Theory of Evolution does encompass both directed and random evolution as possibilities because the base Theory in no way attempts to explain why the changes occur to lead to us sharing common ancestors, rather simply that we do and that we evolved from them. Expanded theories attempting to explain why and the mechanism for evolution are simply offshoots of the main Theory. The Theory itself is simply this: The central idea of biological evolution is that all life on Earth shares a common ancestor, just as you and your cousins share a common grandmother.

    An introduction to evolution
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  4. #174
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,424

    Re: Do you reject evolution?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Because the way the word "random" is being used is inaccurate. It is being used in such a way as to imply that (in this case) mutations happen for absolutely no reason when that is the farthest thing from the truth. Everything happens for a reason. Just because we cannot identify that reason with mechanical/electronic instruments does not mean it does not exist. It also assumes that we know all that we can possibly know. Which if that was the case then Evolution would not be considered a theory. It would be considered as a Law of fact.
    There are no laws of fact in science. For all intents and purposes, a theory in science is what a laymen would consider a fact. It seems as though you are engaging in a semantics argument on the word random. Evolution is as much of a fundamental law in biology as gravity is in physics.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  5. #175
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,897
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Do you reject evolution?

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Aliens
    Sporks.

    See...I can say words that have nothing to do with what is quoted also.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  6. #176
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,445

    Re: Do you reject evolution?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Sporks.

    See...I can say words that have nothing to do with what is quoted also.
    Yes, well, anything could be anything. That doesn't constitute a debate. Also, sporks can be proven to exist scientifically.

  7. #177
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Do you reject evolution?

    As Richard Dawkins, one of the foremost biologists in the entire world, put it: "Life results from the non-random survival of randomly varying replicators." That is, which mutations occur is random, but which ones stick around is not. Understanding the ways in which evolution is random, and the ways in which it is not, is fundamental before anyone can actually start to critique it.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  8. #178
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,897
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Do you reject evolution?

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    There are no laws of fact in science. For all intents and purposes, a theory in science is what a laymen would consider a fact. It seems as though you are engaging in a semantics argument on the word random. Evolution is as much of a fundamental law in biology as gravity is in physics.
    Actually there are facts in science. For instance it is a fact that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Newton's Third Law of Motion. This is testable with verifiable results 100.00% of the time.

    And what laymen consider as fact and theory is irrelevent to an actual fact vs theory. There is a difference between the two.

    Also I'm not engaging in semantics. I'm engaging what is accurate vs what is inaccurate. To me when it comes to science there is a HUGE responsibility to state things accurately, otherwise misconceptions and lies result.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  9. #179
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,897
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Do you reject evolution?

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    Yes, well, anything could be anything. That doesn't constitute a debate. Also, sporks can be proven to exist scientifically.
    Can't have a debate when all you do is present one word posts. Particularly when that word has nothing to do with what was stated in the post you quoted.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #180
    Sage
    Dezaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Seen
    06-28-15 @ 10:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    5,058
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Do you reject evolution?

    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    To say it's a theory leaves open the possiblity of alternatives and improvements, which is important.

    I'm sure that many considered Newton's theory of gravitation to be fact until Einstein came along. The respective theories mostly explain the same facts but do so with a very different underlying model and with very different implications for special situations.

    Heisenburg's theory of how a fission bomb works was totally wrong but because of his stature in the German physics community at the time others were obliged to treat it as fact. Thus the Nazis failed to build an atomic bomb. Meanwhile, at Los Alamos some physicist you never heard of got it right and calculated the right amount of U[235] to pack into a bomb.

    I see no value in reacting to critics by overstating the case.
    When you really examine the situation where the Americans questioned Heisenberg's theory... Do you reach the conclusion that that is equivalent to creationists questioning the theory of evolution?
    You can never be safe from a government that can keep you completely safe from each other and the world. You must choose.

Page 18 of 25 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •