• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do You Believe in Creationism?

Do You Belive In Creationsm?

  • Yes I do - The Biblical version

    Votes: 2 3.7%

  • Yes I do - "Intelligent Design" - God created everything

    Votes: 8 14.8%

  • No - I believe in the Theory of Evolution (Darwinism)

    Votes: 35 64.8%

  • None of the above - please explain

    Votes: 9 16.7%
  • Total voters
    54
EgoffTib said:
The example is not based on that premise. Please, re-read it again.
Click to expand...

:roll:

If we all woke up one morning, and realized that we did not need air to breathe, that would then make the fact(humans need oxygen to live) obsolete.
Click to expand...
So what?
 
Goobieman said:
Evolution is derived from inference.
As with anything derived from interence, it is most certainly deniable, as it is perfectly possible for someone to, today, discover evidence that utterly disporves it.
Click to expand...

Um, no... or haven't you heard of species, separated geographically and subjected to different environmental pressures, losing the ability to interbreed? That's evolution. How about bacteria, subjected to mildly poisonous environments, developing an immunity. That's evolution.

Geez, it's no surprise you're screwed up, you don't even know what you're talking about.

No surprise there at all.
 
Goobieman said:
Wrong.
2+2=4.
This is a fact, regardless who thinks so and who does not.
Click to expand...

Only because we, as humans, have defined it that way. Just like saying up is up and down is down. We made up the words that describe the world.
 
Goobieman said:
:roll:
So what?
Click to expand...

Ah, I forgot that I have to connect the dots for you.. :doh
Goobieman said:
Point is, this means evolution is not a fact. It is a theory that fits the information that is currently available.

If it were a fact, then there could be no infromation that would or could refute it.
Click to expand...

My point was that facts can be overturned and refuted when new evidence is discovered. Therefore, the argument in red is stupid. :2wave:
 
Cephus said:
Only because we, as humans, have defined it that way.
Click to expand...
No. We have not.
We may have assigned a value to the numerals 2 and 4 and assigned a value to the operators '+' and '=', but we as humans did not define 2+2=4.
 
EgoffTib said:
My point was that facts can be overturned and refuted when new evidence is discovered. Therefore, the argument in red is stupid.
Click to expand...
No. The argument in red stands.

A "fact" is something that is true, period.

If something is doiscovered that negates a 'fact', then the fact isnt a fact any more -- it is, as you said, obsolete.

In your case, the 'fact' that 'humans need to breathe O2' wasnt really a fact.
 
Last edited:
Cephus said:
Um, no... or haven't you heard of species, separated geographically and subjected to different environmental pressures, losing the ability to interbreed? That's evolution. How about bacteria, subjected to mildly poisonous environments, developing an immunity. That's evolution.
Click to expand...
Please explain to us how what you posted, above, does anything to discredit the post that you responded to.

Geez, it's no surprise you're screwed up, you don't even know what you're talking about.
Click to expand...
As the desert said to the grain of sand.
 
Goobieman said:
No. The argument in red stands.

A "fact" is something that is true, period.

If something is doiscovered that negates a 'fact', then the fact isnt a fact any more -- it is, as you said, obsolete.

In your case, the 'fact' that 'humans need to breathe O2' wasnt really a fact.
Click to expand...
It was until new information became available... Facts can change. That was my point.
 
EgoffTib said:
It was until new information became available... Facts can change. That was my point.
Click to expand...
Well then -- as the 'fact' of evolution CAN change, it cannot actually be a fact.
 
EgoffTib said:
It was until new information became available... Facts can change. That was my point.
Click to expand...

I don't see how facts can change. This is one of those black and white issues. Eitehr somehtign is fact, or it is not. There is no subjectivity involved. If it turns out that was thought to be a fact is actually false, it doesn't mean it was once true. It was always false, it was just not understood that ti was false.

Use the geocentric universe as an example. Just because everyone BELIEVED the sun traveled around the earth never made it a fact that the sun traveled around the earth. The only "fact" is that everyone who thought this was wrong.
 
Tucker Case said:
I don't see how facts can change. This is one of those black and white issues. Eitehr somehtign is fact, or it is not. There is no subjectivity involved. If it turns out that was thought to be a fact is actually false, it doesn't mean it was once true. It was always false, it was just not understood that ti was false.

Use the geocentric universe as an example. Just because everyone BELIEVED the sun traveled around the earth never made it a fact that the sun traveled around the earth. The only "fact" is that everyone who thought this was wrong.
Click to expand...
At the time, it was considered a fact. That is my point.
 
Tucker Case said:
I don't see how facts can change. This is one of those black and white issues. Eitehr somehtign is fact, or it is not. There is no subjectivity involved. If it turns out that was thought to be a fact is actually false, it doesn't mean it was once true. It was always false, it was just not understood that ti was false.
Click to expand...
Correct. :mrgreen:
 
EgoffTib said:
At the time, it was considered a fact. That is my point.
Click to expand...
And, as I said, societal consensus does not a fact make.
That's why there was no need to address that part of your post.
 
Goobieman said:
And, as I said, societal consensus does not a fact make.
That's why there was no need to address that part of your post.
Click to expand...
...and my point was that we can never be too sure of what "truly" is a fact, since new information can always overturn our previous misconceptions.
 
EgoffTib said:
...and my point was that we can never be too sure of what "truly" is a fact, since new information can always overturn our previous misconceptions.
Click to expand...
And so, you then agree that Evolution is not a fact.
 
Goobieman said:
And so, you then agree that Evolution is not a fact.
Click to expand...
My argument is that we can never truly know what a "fact" is, because we as human beings like omnipotence. Therefore, all we have to go off of are our sensory organs, gut feelings, logic and evidence.
 
Tucker Case said:
I don't see how facts can change. This is one of those black and white issues. Eitehr somehtign is fact, or it is not. There is no subjectivity involved. If it turns out that was thought to be a fact is actually false, it doesn't mean it was once true. It was always false, it was just not understood that ti was false.
Click to expand...

When you are walking outside on a clear and sunny day is it a fact that the sky is blue? At night or on cloudy day when the sky is in fact NOT blue is the fact the the sky is blue now false but was once true?
 
EgoffTib said:
My argument is that we can never truly know what a "fact" is, because we as human beings like omnipotence. Therefore, all we have to go off of are our sensory organs, gut feelings, logic and evidence.
Click to expand...
And so, you then agree that Evolution is not a fact.
 
I believe in evolution but do not discount the possibility of of an "intelligent" spark starting life.
 
Gibberish said:
When you are walking outside on a clear and sunny day is it a fact that the sky is blue? At night or on cloudy day when the sky is in fact NOT blue is the fact the the sky is blue now false but was once true?
Click to expand...

There are no changes of fact. The sky is not blue. The sky APPEARS blue in daylight because the molecules in the atmosphere cause a Rayleigh scattering of light waves. In essense, during the day the sky appears blue because blue light is scattered about so that in every direction one looks, blue light alone will hit the eye.

But the sky itself has no color, only the light which is scattered does.

The fact is that the sky is colorless. The appearance of blue is actually a phenomenon of light scattering.

When no light is present to scatter, the is no scattered light. ;)

Belief that the sky itself is blue is erroneous.
 
Tucker Case said:
There are no changes of fact. The sky is not blue. The sky APPEARS blue in daylight because the molecules in the atmosphere cause a Rayleigh scattering of light waves. In essense, during the day the sky appears blue because blue light is scattered about so that in every direction one looks, blue light alone will hit the eye.

But the sky itself has no color, only the light which is scattered does.

The fact is that the sky is colorless. The appearance of blue is actually a phenomenon of light scattering.

When no light is present to scatter, the is no scattered light. ;)

Belief that the sky itself is blue is erroneous.
Click to expand...

All this, because someone thinks that evolution is a FACT.

:rofl
 
Tucker Case said:
There are no changes of fact. The sky is not blue. The sky APPEARS blue in daylight because the molecules in the atmosphere cause a Rayleigh scattering of light waves. In essense, during the day the sky appears blue because blue light is scattered about so that in every direction one looks, blue light alone will hit the eye.

But the sky itself has no color, only the light which is scattered does.

The fact is that the sky is colorless. The appearance of blue is actually a phenomenon of light scattering.

When no light is present to scatter, the is no scattered light. ;)

Belief that the sky itself is blue is erroneous.
Click to expand...

Was hoping you wouldn't realize that. :)

Let's use the dollar bill example. You hold a dollar bill in your hand. That is a fact. You hand the dollar bill to someone else. Is that fact that you held a dollar bill false?
 
Gibberish said:
Let's use the dollar bill example. You hold a dollar bill in your hand. That is a fact.
Click to expand...
That is not necessarily a fact.
You may think you hve $1 in your hands, but you may very well not.
But, ignoring that...
You hand the dollar bill to someone else.
Is that fact that you held a dollar bill false?
Click to expand...
You HAD a dollar bill. Past tense.
 
Goobieman said:
All this, because someone thinks that evolution is a FACT.

:rofl
Click to expand...

Evolution is a scientific theory based on factual elements. It is not a fact itself.

Creationism is a belief system in its entirety.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom