(02-12-2009 06:32 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Lincoln was a eloquent statesman,tyrant and murderer. I don't worship people that do harm to others.

Darwin's theory was brilliant, but it is still a theory yet proven. I believe eventually it will.

very well said

(02-12-2009 11:39 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Darwin has promoted the worst science since alchemy, and probably the biggest waste of tax-payer dollars on research. All tautology and conjecture.
Even pro-evolution academics are catching on,
http://www.newsweek.com/id/180103?gt1=43002

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/scienc...wanted=all

Quote:Equating evolution with Charles Darwin ignores 150 years of discoveries, including most of what scientists understand about evolution. Such as: Gregor Mendel’s patterns of heredity

And debunking evolutionary theory further,
http://thepoint.breakpoint.org/2009/01/t...inism.html

+1

A bunch of unproven theory and conjecture. There was a recent story that said a massive volcanic eruption wiped out 90% of all life about 250 million years ago, did that mean the evolutionary process restarted? Would there have been enough time with the clock restarted?

(02-12-2009 07:01 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(02-12-2009 11:39 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Darwin has promoted the worst science since alchemy, and probably the biggest waste of tax-payer dollars on research. All tautology and conjecture.
Even pro-evolution academics are catching on,
http://www.newsweek.com/id/180103?gt1=43002

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/scienc...wanted=all

Quote:Equating evolution with Charles Darwin ignores 150 years of discoveries, including most of what scientists understand about evolution. Such as: Gregor Mendel’s patterns of heredity

And debunking evolutionary theory further,
http://thepoint.breakpoint.org/2009/01/t...inism.html

+1

A bunch of unproven theory and conjecture. There was a recent story that said a massive volcanic eruption wiped out 90% of all life about 250 million years ago, did that mean the evolutionary process restarted? Would there have been enough time with the clock restarted?

Both theories are unproven and conjecture at this point. Science and technology will probably come up with a definitive answer in our lifetime.
I have no horse in this race....I only really care about making my time on this planet as comfortable and pleasant as possible and allowing my neighbors the same freedoms and happiness that I seek.

(02-12-2009 07:01 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(02-12-2009 11:39 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Darwin has promoted the worst science since alchemy, and probably the biggest waste of tax-payer dollars on research. All tautology and conjecture.
Even pro-evolution academics are catching on,
http://www.newsweek.com/id/180103?gt1=43002

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/scienc...wanted=all

Quote:Equating evolution with Charles Darwin ignores 150 years of discoveries, including most of what scientists understand about evolution. Such as: Gregor Mendel’s patterns of heredity

And debunking evolutionary theory further,
http://thepoint.breakpoint.org/2009/01/t...inism.html

+1

A bunch of unproven theory and conjecture. There was a recent story that said a massive volcanic eruption wiped out 90% of all life about 250 million years ago, did that mean the evolutionary process restarted? Would there have been enough time with the clock restarted?

You're right... Right now it is a theory yet to be proven. It also remains a theory because it hasn't been proven wrong. So right now it is the standard.

(02-12-2009 07:29 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(02-12-2009 07:01 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(02-12-2009 11:39 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Darwin has promoted the worst science since alchemy, and probably the biggest waste of tax-payer dollars on research. All tautology and conjecture.
Even pro-evolution academics are catching on,
http://www.newsweek.com/id/180103?gt1=43002

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/scienc...wanted=all

Quote:Equating evolution with Charles Darwin ignores 150 years of discoveries, including most of what scientists understand about evolution. Such as: Gregor Mendel’s patterns of heredity

And debunking evolutionary theory further,
http://thepoint.breakpoint.org/2009/01/t...inism.html

+1

A bunch of unproven theory and conjecture. There was a recent story that said a massive volcanic eruption wiped out 90% of all life about 250 million years ago, did that mean the evolutionary process restarted? Would there have been enough time with the clock restarted?

You're right... Right now it is a theory yet to be proven. It also remains a theory because it hasn't been proven wrong. So right now it is the standard.

By your logic I could put forth a theory that an alien life form came hear after stepping in crap on its own planet when said alien set foot on earth the bacteria from the crap became the origin of life. My theory is no more full of crap the Darwin's. My theory can not be proven wrong either does that make it the standard?

You can, in fact, put that down as a theory. But remember that to have a theory that actually makes waves in this world you must have the approval of a significant portion of the scientific community. A theory is nothing without approval.

....if only the liberals, who supposedly believe in evolution, actually "believed" Darwin's teachings we'd be A-OK. .....but oh no, they're policies are reverse Darwinian.

(02-12-2009 07:01 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  There was a recent story that said a massive volcanic eruption wiped out 90% of all life about 250 million years ago, did that mean the evolutionary process restarted? Would there have been enough time with the clock restarted?

The evolutionary process never stopped, and never does. Major extinction events just open new opportunites. I don't think it is simple coincidence that after major extinctions the top of the food chain usually switches hands.

(02-12-2009 07:01 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  A bunch of unproven theory and conjecture. There was a recent story that said a massive volcanic eruption wiped out 90% of all life about 250 million years ago, did that mean the evolutionary process restarted? Would there have been enough time with the clock restarted?

Why would the evolutionary process get restarted? 90% isn't 100%. Life, and thus evolution, goes on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottleneck

(02-12-2009 07:29 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  You're right... Right now it is a theory yet to be proven. It also remains a theory because it hasn't been proven wrong. So right now it is the standard.

No it wouldn't. It would be a hypothesis. If NC Herd could provide any evidence which supports his claim it might become a theory. But it, like many of the arguments that ID'ers use to try to promote creationism, would still only be a hypothesis. Confusing laws, hypotheses, and theories is also part of the agenda, which seems to be working based on some of the responses in this thread.

Evolution isn't a theory because it hasn't been proven wrong - it's a theory because vast amounts of scientific evidence - biologicial, geological, genetic - supports it. Much like relativity, gravity, atomic theory, etc. Technically not "proven", but possessing overwhelming evidence in support of it that they are unlikely to be overturned on a fundamental level, though new discoveries and understanding it likely to fill in our gaps in understanding about these "unproven theories" as well.

(02-12-2009 11:39 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/scienc...wanted=all

Quote:Equating evolution with Charles Darwin ignores 150 years of discoveries, including most of what scientists understand about evolution. Such as: Gregor Mendel’s patterns of heredity

I don't believe I've every heard someone who believed in evolution refer to themselves as a darwinist or profess a belief in darwinism. It's only the opponents of evolution who try to inject these terms into the conversation.

(02-12-2009 10:53 PM)Wildebeest Wrote:  

(02-12-2009 07:29 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  You're right... Right now it is a theory yet to be proven. It also remains a theory because it hasn't been proven wrong. So right now it is the standard.

No it wouldn't. It would be a hypothesis. If NC Herd could provide any evidence which supports his claim it might become a theory. But it, like many of the arguments that ID'ers use to try to promote creationism, would still only be a hypothesis. Confusing laws, hypotheses, and theories is also part of the agenda, which seems to be working based on some of the responses in this thread.

Evolution isn't a theory because it hasn't been proven wrong - it's a theory because vast amounts of scientific evidence - biologicial, geological, genetic - supports it.

I agree with you in the sense that if the evidence supported it, it would be a valid theory like atomic theory or relativity.

Where I disagree is that the empirical evidence supports it. That's where the "scam" part comes in.

Furthermore there is abundant evidence that challenges/discredits each/all of the current models of evolution...that's why evolutionists fight so vehemently amongst themselves.

Darwin said the evidence was against him.

I am going to come out and say it.

I believe in evolution.

There.

(02-13-2009 09:15 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I am going to come out and say it.

I believe in evolution.

There.

ditto...but...I'm certainly prepared to be wrong.

We do know that life and organisms evolve, and have evolved over the past few billion years. There are organisms alive now that were not alive before and vice versa. The hard part is figuring out the how, when, where, and why.

Goes to show you that if models cannot predict or solve evolution, How can you expect to predict or solve events like hurricanes, tornado, or GLOBAL WARMING.

(02-13-2009 08:42 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Darwin said the evidence was against him.

At the time, he was right. The 150 years since he published his work have shed a lot of new light on the subject.

(02-13-2009 08:30 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Where I disagree is that the empirical evidence supports it. That's where the "scam" part comes in.

Furthermore there is abundant evidence that challenges/discredits each/all of the current models of evolution...that's why evolutionists fight so vehemently amongst themselves.

That's certainly one interpretation. The Flat Earth society certainly disputes the earth being round, but I don't agree with their interpretation either.

Of course there are disputes over the mechanism right now. Interpretation of limited data sets over time scales that aren't directly measurable in the laboratory are going to lead to those healthy scientific debates. There is no scientific debate that evolution and natural selection have occured and do occur.

(02-13-2009 09:15 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I believe in evolution.

Evolution isn't something you believe in. The tooth fairy is something you believe in.

Evolution, like gravity, relativity, and quantum mechanics, is something you can choose to accept or reject.