Is Evolution a Dangerous Idea? If so, why?

@Ionus,

Quote:

It probably is fact but it is still theory. Scientifically proving something takes it from theory to fact. HIV can not be proven to cause AIDS. It most likely does, but it is not scientific fact. I thought you would understand the difference.

This is unbelievable! This is the oldest Creationist argument that is being and has been proven wrong for ages...a scientific theory consists of facts...and theory, in science means "explanation"...the word "theory" has also a colloquial meaning, which also means a "guess"...just like the word "bad" means "good" in the colloquial sense...and the word "gay", which means happy, and in the colloquial sense means "a homosexual person"...right Ionus? And I dare to venture that you would not be pleased with my explanation either...the link below is a video that debunks the creationist argument that revolves around Evolution being a "theory" or guess, and it is not composed of facts...hope, we don't have to hear from this again...enjoy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIm2H0ksawg

2 Replies

@Jason Proudmoore,

Jason Proudmoore wrote:

Quote:
It probably is fact but it is still theory. Scientifically proving something takes it from theory to fact. HIV can not be proven to cause AIDS. It most likely does, but it is not scientific fact. I thought you would understand the difference.

This is unbelievable! This is the oldest Creationist argument that is being and has been proven wrong for ages...a scientific theory consists of facts...and theory, in science means "explanation"...the word "theory" has also a colloquial meaning, which also means a "guess"...just like the word "bad" means "good" in the colloquial sense...and the word "gay", which means happy, and in the colloquial sense means "a homosexual person"...right Ionus? And I dare to venture that you would not be pleased with my explanation either...the link below is a video that debunks the creationist argument that revolves around Evolution being a "theory" or guess, and it is not composed of facts...hope, we don't have to hear from this again...enjoy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIm2H0ksawg

FM and I already told him this, but he refuses to accept it.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Since people with the IQ lower than 90 understand better by looking at illustrations and moving images, its possible that a video might convince him of the fact...you never know.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

And don't be tempted to eschew your dignity to such an extent as to think Ionus and myself are one and the same. Even just attempting to give the impression of it. All it shows is how uneducated you are.

At least my reading comprehension arent so poor as to confuse who actually made that claim.

I didn't say you made the claim. Read the sentences carefully. Slowly with your lips moving.

Quote:

Make them think they are superior to the "rest of us" knowing that Ionus and myself are of English extraction. And the "rest of us" can now be happy having been informed of it.

ctually, I was trying to be kind, since the alternative would have been to state how symmetrically ignorant you both are. OK which is it?

We have it in common with Darwin.

What's with being burnt out? What else can you show me? I got to nothing. What a relief. Timed it pretty good too. Is it a fault being old?

I think of extraction intellectually not biologically and I can tell from Io's prose that he hasn't read the same stuff I have. I'm European with a fair dash American. All prose is just prose to you. A series of words that you think you understand. Like Dawkins' shite. Instruction manual stuff. No depth. Surface is all there is.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

I didn't say you made the claim.

So you must have some disconnect going on in your head. When you address that statement to me and as its stands by itself, how else would a person interpret it/ You are using an Aonus double twaddle movement to try to occupy boith sides of the issue. If youd let your errors just drop you wouldnt appear to be the fool as you so often do.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Previously it has been pointed out to him by someone who speaks Greek that his sig line uses an incorrect translation. He thinks of himself as a Philosopher and that Philosophy is science.

And I explained to her that even if Aristotle said "Epic tales", I would have to ask her about the context in which he (Aristotle) meant it... Aristotle (and other philosophers) obviously questioned the Greek pantheon and got in trouble because of it...and then I ask you, is an epic tale an actual event or something made up? (you have to remember that Homeric tales were regarded as real events and not myths to the ancient Greeks)...should we say that if Aristotle said "epic tales", he meant myths (lies), within the context in which it was said, at the same time when Homer accounts were considered real?
The person who speaks Greek actually confirmed the authenticity of my sig, without knowing.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Bullshit. You made two un-necessary "nudge-nudge-wink-winks" in the direction that Io and I (in creation one's nature neither honours nor forgives) are the same person and he posts when I'm snuggled up in my charp pit and I post when he's doing whatever he does in his.

I got burnt out with Darwinists and evolutionists and scientific methodologists as well as with devious seductresses, gourmet porn, hand wringers, save the earthers, media selectivity and all points "look at me Mom--I'm on telly".

They are all empty. They end up staring at a blank wall glazed over. Catatonic.

You can see it in Origins. One species, without a definition of species other than it suiting the labelers, then another and then another and so on and so on and so forth (I think I'll call it a finch--it rhymes with cinch, worth a chapter.)

You can see evolution stark naked in the TV ratings. And on the catwalks.

Hey-I've read the Ms Fossil Ida is not what it was hyped up to be when you all shot your premature gush load out all over it. From Lucy to Ida- just monkeys it seems, lemurs and such. What's next--Belinda? All the same. Novelty is all. Gotta keep 'em slavering. Just another brick in the wall.

Darwin started a study of facial expressions. None of which survived to become fossils. He must have realised what a dead end fossils were. Although I don't recommend studying his facial expression.

I knew a guy who had a big photo of Darwin in his hallway. One day an atheist knocked on his door to set him on the right track and when he saw the picture, which was framed, he said--"Oh--I see you are already an atheist from that portrait" pointing at it. My mate said--"Oh" ( ironically), " I keep that there and tell my lads that if they don't stop wanking that's what they'll look like when they mature."

1 Reply

@spendius,

You don't get out of the house or pub much, do you spendi?

0 Replies

Hey Io-- I don't know if your up yet but I'm going to bed and I must say before I do that I don't envy you arguing with these big time intellectuals who think muscles impress women when it's actually money and big dicks. The former taking priority.

I'll bet JP is a Freddie Mercury fan.

3 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

envy you arguing with these big time intellectuals who think muscles impress women when it's actually money and big dicks.

I agree with you that women might be impressed with big dicks...but money? What kind of women are you dating? And why are you generalizing?

Quote:

I'll bet JP is a Freddie Mercury fan.

If Freddie Mercury was not a religious bigot, count me in as a fan. Twisted Evil

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Hey Io-- I don't know if your up yet but I'm going to bed and I must say before I do that I don't envy you arguing with these big time intellectuals who think muscles impress women when it's actually money and big dicks. The former taking priority.

I'll bet JP is a Freddie Mercury fan.

Spendigan's Wake - Whew. Consider the possibilities.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Thank you for the ref. It is one persons opinion on evolution as a theory. You fail to realise it does nothing to address The issue I raised which was the general principle of how theories come to be and when they can become fact was only mentioned. Boy you really are avoiding the scientific definitions here.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

I am not being dismissive of evolution. You are all fired up to fight a religious fundamentalist and you cant even change targets.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

Theres nothing new out there in the Creation or ID warehouse of brilliant ideas.

Come on, Gomer..you can do better than that...

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

Quote:

What backwards non-thinkers like spendius and the extreme Christian right fail to recognize is that science is based on observation and testing.

So we can distinguish between facts and theories. What science worshippers like you fail to take into account is that science is a long way from explaining everything. Perhaps if you are limited in your intelligence, everything to be invented has been invented.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

My only argument is that its incredibly stupid to try to invite the "vampire" of Fundamentalism into the public schools.

In a democracy expression of opinion and freedom of religion are foundational. Why is this only a problem in the USA ? Other countries have schools that teach science and religion and religion is not allowed to contradict science.

Quote:

Its not lost on most of us that these two are of English extraction

And proud of it. Why ? Do you wear a pikelhaub ?

1 Reply

@Jason Proudmoore,

Quote:

Quote:
Your logic is shockingly bad and painful to read.

And yet, you still read it...ironic...anyone?

What fools like you fail to understand is that if I were to ignore opinion I would be a bigot. It seems I am forever defining words for you.

Quote:

And what is your explanation?

If you werent a bigot you would have read it by now. Try starting at the beginning of the thread.

Quote:

I gave you the verses from the Bible that teach or promote that the Earth is flat...deal with it.

No, you didnt. Pray no-one checks you up on that or you will look even more of a fool...assuming that is possible.

Quote:

I've already told you that the Bible promotes the earth as being flat, and I even provided you with a little video and an illustration regarding what the ancients knew about Earth, and the verses...and did you know that the ancients rejected the idea of a world being spherical...after the library of Alexandria was burned, later Eratosthenes's work was found and the idea was still rejected by the church...it was then later that Christopher Columbus confirmed the fact....what do you say about that? Do you also reject this?

Do you see what happens when you try logic ? You fall flat....Eratosthene calculated the earth's radius - he didnt prove it was round. Columbus didnt prove the earth was round - he calculated the circumference to be a third of what it really is. Early sailing peoples knew the earth was round - they didnt prove it. The author's of the Bible knew the earth was round - thats why you cant produce evidence they thought it was flat.

Quote:

So, are you actually telling me that the ancients used the word "round" for "sphere", knowing that the Egyptians, the Greeks, the Romans, and even the Hebrews knew the difference between the two?

Sphere - do you mean the hebrew word sphr meaning book or the greek word sphaira meaning globe or ball ? Round - the origins are uncertain but do you mean fullness ? You prove again to be a wishful thinker when it comes your knowledge. The ancients knew the world was curved in all directions. Understand now ?

Quote:

a naturalistic explanation

And when you say natural you mean unnatural....

Quote:

Despite whether the ancients believed that the hand was possessed by spirits, didn't make it factual...
And we now know that drugs nor diseases can be attributed a " spritual world"...it was a erroneous explanation of the time that is considered preposterous now.

But science was complete then..it knew everything just like it knows everything today...it is not possible for knowledge to exist that you are not aware of...you are the Great Gayson Prodmemore. Science is now complete.

Quote:

Prayer has proven to be worthless....

So how does a placebo work ? You are the dumbest....you were the runt of the litter, right ?

Quote:

if you were a little scientific, you've would've known that there have been several scientific investigations performed by universities on the power of prayer

If you had any scientific training you would know there is more to science than one opinion or fools like you would be out of control.

Quote:

I said : Show me what science has done to the natural world, to society..to fools like you who worship themselves and man ?

Again, it was beyond your comprehension and ability. Pollution, over-population, lots of gadgets that no-one needs but has to have, consumerism that is destroying our natural resource and heritage, creation of super-germs that could wipe us out...the list is long and I tire of typing for a fool like you. Look it up.

Quote:

No, science doesn't kill anyone...

The nuclear weapon stockpile was natures idea...sorry for you that would be unnatures idea....or a religious invention ?

Quote:

Quote:
Arent you the clown who said religion has killed more people than any other cause ? Or was that one of your fellow worshippers ?

No, really....religion has killed and still kills more than any other cause, as you put it.

So the non-religious nazis who used science were the good guys ? It was the evil christian countries that caused WWII....your stupidity is setting a new standard for an IQ test...albeit the minimum.

Quote:

we must promote education and separation of church and state for the citizens of the world.

For once, Gayson Prodmemore, you are making sense. You agree with me.

Quote:

does it look like I've been abusing steroids?

It looks like a little man with a chip on his shoulder and narcistic homosexual tendencies with a degree of stupidity unequaled even on the internet.

Quote:

Quote:
How does that apply to me, because I have never said I believe in the Bible to be litterally true, but we shouldnt let facts get in the way of a fool and his ranting.
Your inclination toward the Bible and your rejection of science is a very clear give-away...take that for a fact.

A fact from you...your big chance for a first and you blew it...dont tell your mum.

Quote:

I like when you try to label me as homosexual while you have seemed to have studied my avatar picture so thoroughly...

Oh I am convinced you like it. Let me guess..you were trying to take a picture of your arse for Gayboy International (centrefold play bunny) when the camera slipped due to excessive use of KY.

1 Reply

@Jason Proudmoore,

Quote:

a scientific theory consists of facts...and theory, in science means "explanation"...the word "theory" has also a colloquial meaning, which also means a "guess".

Incorrect. I gave a definition of theory before. You were either too lazy or incompetent or bigotted to read it. Read the following :

Quote:

I qouted : Theories are analytical tools for understanding, explaining, and making predictions about a given subject matter. Theory is constructed of a set of sentences which consist entirely of true statements about the subject matter under consideration. However, the truth of any one of these statements is always relative to the whole theory.

And some day they become a fcat in themselves. Some theories are more accurate then others, some have more facts in the, so to label a theory as fact because you worship science and blow scientists is stupid beyond belief.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

I don't envy you arguing with these big time intellectuals

It is a duty to educate..

Quote:

I'll bet JP is a Freddie Mercury fan.

I heard they threw him out of the Queen fan club for being "too over-the-top bizarely gay".

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Thank you for the ref. It is one persons opinion on evolution as a theory. You fail to realise it does nothing to address The issue I raised which was the general principle of how theories come to be and when they can become fact was only mentioned. Boy you really are avoiding the scientific definitions here.

Obviously reading comprehension isnt your strong point but S J Goulds entire paper was that a theory (in science) is both an explanation and fact. Your concept that "facts" are the highest order is just not correct when used in science>
Im sure that, several weeks afetr this kerfuffle, you will quietly embrace this news . You are only being obstreporous because you have sort of backed yourelf into a corner with your "Opinion" that there is some kind of hierarchy implied between theories and facts in science.

The fact that a theory can always be discarded mechanism by the introduction of new and (Contrarian) facts doesnt seem to enter your brain at all. FActs support and facts can ruin or cause to be amended any theory. Therefore, the facts are the support mechanism of theories and are , therefore, that which makes the theory whole and applicable. I dont know of any scientific Theory that separates or Layers its facts and lies at a lower level than its bag of supportive facts.

Your reference to Newtonian gravity was a LAW, the EInsteinian Theory of Universal Gravitation is a theory that cannot be described in a single equation like Newtons Law.

I got a smile out of your response to Goulds little paper about theory as fact, because hed presented that case in reponse to the Creationist bullshit that Evolution was "merely a theory" . So you are in good Creationist company even though you claim to understand evolutions "truth"

1 Reply

Is Evolution a Dangerous Idea? If so, why?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know