View Poll Results: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

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

    38 53.52%
  • No

    33 46.48%
Page 41 of 42 FirstFirst ... 3139404142 LastLast
Results 401 to 410 of 420

Thread: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

  1. #401
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,512

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    "Belief" is a dirty word in scientific circles.
    Yes, unless it is based on fact, logic, observation, and experimentation. If it is based on thin air, then it is indeed a dirty word, just as it should be.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  2. #402
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Yes, unless it is based on fact, logic, observation, and experimentation. If it is based on thin air, then it is indeed a dirty word, just as it should be.
    Oh, well then 99% of religion isn't a dirty belief. Well that's good news.

  3. #403
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 02:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Yes, unless it is based on fact, logic, observation, and experimentation. If it is based on thin air, then it is indeed a dirty word, just as it should be.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Oh, well then 99% of religion isn't a dirty belief. Well that's good news.
    Please inform inform us which of the following are based on facts, logic, observation, and experimentation:
    1) Unverifiable claims made in holy book tales
    2) Unverifiable claims made by purported "prophets"
    3) Hear-say
    4) Unverifiable personal experiences claimed by another person.
    Last edited by scourge99; 03-23-11 at 11:53 PM.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  4. #404
    Student
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    04-11-11 @ 09:43 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    295

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    "Belief" is a dirty word in scientific circles.
    I beg to differ. I watched a program on NGC not too long ago on evolution. I counted the word "believe" 70 times in the two hours. It wasn't a preacher using it. It was a paleontologist.

  5. #405
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,495

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by LookingGlass View Post
    I beg to differ. I watched a program on NGC not too long ago on evolution. I counted the word "believe" 70 times in the two hours. It wasn't a preacher using it. It was a paleontologist.
    This begs the question...

    Why???
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  6. #406
    Student
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    04-11-11 @ 09:43 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    295

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    Theories are NOT "proven". They are supported. Evolution is nearly as strongly supported as the theory of gravitation (not to be confused with the phenomenon known as gravity). Read a book! I suggest "the greatest show on earth: the evidence for evolution"
    Theory: A theory is what one or more hypotheses become once they have been verified and accepted to be true. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. Unfortunately, even some scientists often use the term "theory" in a more colloquial sense, when they really mean to say "hypothesis." That makes its true meaning in science even more confusing to the general public.

    In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.

    In fact, some laws, such as the law of gravity, can also be theories when taken more generally. The law of gravity is expressed as a single mathematical expression and is presumed to be true all over the universe and all through time. Without such an assumption, we can do no science based on gravity's effects. But from the law, we derived the theory of gravity which describes how gravity works, what causes it, and how it behaves. We also use that to develop another theory, Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, in which gravity plays a crucial role. The basic law is intact, but the theory expands it to include various and complex situations involving space and time.

    The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic. A law describes a single action, whereas a theory explains an entire group of related phenomena. And, whereas a law is a postulate that forms the foundation of the scientific method, a theory is the end result of that same process.

    A simple analogy can be made using a slingshot and an automobile.

    A scientific law is like a slingshot. A slingshot has but one moving part--the rubber band. If you put a rock in it and draw it back, the rock will fly out at a predictable speed, depending upon the distance the band is drawn back.

    An automobile has many moving parts, all working in unison to perform the chore of transporting someone from one point to another point. An automobile is a complex piece of machinery. Sometimes, improvements are made to one or more component parts. A new set of spark plugs that are composed of a better alloy that can withstand heat better, for example, might replace the existing set. But the function of the automobile as a whole remains unchanged.

    A theory is like the automobile. Components of it can be changed or improved upon, without changing the overall truth of the theory as a whole.

    Some scientific theories include the theory of evolution, the theory of relativity, the atomic theory, and the quantum theory. All of these theories are well documented and proved beyond reasonable doubt. Yet scientists continue to tinker with the component hypotheses of each theory in an attempt to make them more elegant and concise, or to make them more all-encompassing. Theories can be tweaked, but they are seldom, if ever, entirely replaced.

    A theory is developed only through the scientific method, meaning it is the final result of a series of rigorous processes. Note that theories do not become laws. Scientific laws must exist prior to the start of using the scientific method because, as stated earlier, laws are the foundation for all science.

    Thanks for the admonition to read. I can offer you the same advise. The book you suggest is tantamount to the bible. So I'll pass.

  7. #407
    Student
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    04-11-11 @ 09:43 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    295

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    This begs the question...

    Why???
    The scientist speaking was usually referring to something which current science or technology is incapable of proving or in some instances defining. So they have to believe it to be so.

  8. #408
    Student
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    04-11-11 @ 09:43 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    295

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    that is the silliest thing I've heard in a long time. Did you come up with it or did your pastor/priest tell you it?
    Scientists don't try to disprove the muslim god, the hindu god, etc. They are unconcerned with that stuff. Scientists, such as biologists look for explanations for:
    1) facts observed in nature
    2) phenomenon reproducible in the lab

    It just so happens that every once and awhile a scientific explanation conflicts with a particular religion's holy-book tales. Then the religious have a temper-tantrum. This has happened before: galileo and the mormons are two examples.
    Perhaps it was an overstatement. Scientists involved in evolutionary studies are usually more concerned with when their next government grant is coming, since that is how they get paid.



    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    An understanding of evolution allows us to create flu vaccines, grow more efficient and plentiful crops, and breed animals for desirable traits (for food or affection). These are just SOME applications that probably wouldn't be possible without the theory of evolution.
    I think you are confusing evolution and genetics. While the two are linked, they are not the same thing.

  9. #409
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,495

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by LookingGlass View Post
    The scientist speaking was usually referring to something which current science or technology is incapable of proving or in some instances defining. So they have to believe it to be so.
    I meant why you would be counting how many times it was said, lol.

    Oh well. My lame attempt at humor was utter fail.
    Last edited by Black Dog; 03-24-11 at 03:48 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  10. #410
    Student
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    04-11-11 @ 09:43 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    295

    Re: In the US: Is the debate on evolution between scientists and the religious?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    I meant why you would be counting how many times it was said, lol.

    Oh well. My lame attempt at humor was utter fail.
    To answer your question, boredom probably.

    Other than that I found it fascinating that a scientist was using such verbiage in relation to a subject that is supposed to have such concrete fact. A fact is a fact. It doesn't require belief.

    If your doctor tells you that you have cancer. You have cancer. Whether or not you believe is irrelevant.

Page 41 of 42 FirstFirst ... 3139404142 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
  •