bouzane said:
thranx said:
bouzane said:
thranx said:
bouzane said:
@thranx
I'm condescending toward you because you are extremely ignorant, inexcusably so. Why bother to participate in such a discussion at all? I have no patience for such individuals as yourself.
|
perhaps you should use valid counter arguments instead of trying to attack my character and intelligence. You haven't even made a counter argument.
|
Posting valid counter arguments like I did on the previous page as opposed to the drivel you posted when you did nothing more than link to the dictionary definion of the word theory and reiterate the exact same drivel you have been this entire time?
|
seeing as your only argument was i used theory incorrect i thought perhaps you wanted a definition. So there it is. The rest of your post contained nothing. there are plenty of missing links. Pease show me the path that human evolution took every step of the way. I have not seen that yet. Did you even read all of my posts? I have already agreed to evolution happening and being a valid theory, it just does not fully explain how humans came to be. Either they have not found all of the evidence yet, or its not there, either way there is plenty of room for doubt in the "theory" of human evolution. (although i do personaly believe in human evolution, i can clearly see the other side has valid arguments especially when so many people spout human evoltion as absolute fact when it is not)
|
Sorry but the Webster definition is vague and woefully inadequate for defining scientific theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
|
" The term "theory" implies that scientists have high confidence that a theory's predictions will prove accurate in the future."
From your link in the first paragraph. High confidence, not 100% certanity. Is it that hard for you to accept that a theory is not a scientific fact but an acculumantion of ideas and thoughts that have yet to be disproven and in all likely hood probably are true but can not be proved so. Cause that is all i am saying. so since your link also says that can we now agree?
from your second link:
". Scientific theories also contain speculation at first, but they develop over time and many are rejected as they are specifically crafted for the purpose or function of being testable. In this way, theories can be constructed using logic, models, or schemes for generating testable hypotheses with precision.[4][11][1]"
