People or Religion, who corrupts who?

[ToraTiger]

Scoobes said:

DaRev said:

Scoobes said:

A theory in science isn't the same as a theory in common day to day life. A theory in science has to be rigorously tested to the point of being considered fact. The only thing higher in scientific terms are laws (e.g. the laws of thermodynamics).

The bolded is simply wrong. You need to relook at your own definition of fact. Just because you put fact before a sentence doesn't make it so.

http://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/

1. Boss man, a theory is only a theory because it cannot be proven, or else it would be fact. The fact that you stick the word “scientific” or any form thereof onto a theory doesn’t make it fact to anyone other than you and your monkey-like friends. FACT, evolution CANNOT be proven thus it remains just theory, whether scientific, religious, or otherwise. You then chose to accept it or not.

2. You people ask religious believers to produce evidence of the creator, but when we ask you to provide the same standard of proof for much less, e.g. about evolution, and you can’t. I don't give a rat's ass what you and you're scientific friends believe in anymore tthan you believe in what me and other religious people believe in. We're talking about FACT here, not what other people like you belive. The only thing you can produce is what is acceptable to other people like yourselves.

3. So you’re trying to tell me human reproduction (as oppose to evolution) is not a FACT?

4. By the way, that ‘source’ or ‘examples’ of evolution you posted is laughable. Now here is point where I usually get banned, but I will resist the urge to say what I really want to. Anyways, those example of ‘evolution’ are junk. They are nothing more than e.g. a man moving from a hot climate to a cold climate  and once getting there, almost freezing to death his first winter before slowly adapting to the climate over the years of him being in the cold. He does not evolve pal, he just adapts to his surroundings. That’s totally different thing from saying that he grew fur and is now a new species, different than scratching his butt all day and picking flees to being a scientist....wait o_ 0

5. In any event, the FACT remains, you CANNOT prove that humans EVOLVED from anything other than what is human. So keep sticking your ‘testers’ up the buttholes of those little frogies and butterflies, maybe, just maybe, oneday, someday, you will produce one of those monkey-like creatures. Then you can roger him till he turns to a human - good luck with that.  Until then I'll keep believeing that Humans come from Humans, Birds come from Birds, and Scientist come from monkey-like creatures.

 

1. I explained this in the last post. If you choose to ignore the information I give, that's your perogative.

2. I've stopped asking religious people for evidence because for the most part they can't. Scientists.... actually, not only scientists, general people with a greater level of knowledge and understanding of basic biology, present you with evidence, it's your choice to ignore it.

3. Did I say human reproduction is not fact? No, you're just assuming I did when I pointed out evolution was a fact and making yourself look a bit silly. In fact, the science you hold in such disdain can actually describe the process of reproduction from genetics to epigenetic effects (also a part of evolution) during embryonic development to the birth of the baby. Using these techniques we can even warn the parents if the baby has a genetic disease that they need to be aware of.

4. No, your understanding is quite limited if you think the examples given are of a single individual. Try a family of individuals moving from a hot to cold climate and surviving in extreme conditions. Over numerous generations the great-great-great-great grandchildren have paler skin as they don't need as much protection from the sun, have larger fat reserves for greater insulation etc.

Actually, even individual adaptation is a part of evolution as we can track how an individuals physical adpatation can make changes on a chemical level (to your DNA) and how these can be inherited from parent to child (epigenetics).

5. Studies of DNA sequences and genomes from a range of different species say otherwise. But if it's difficult to grasp, maybe this picture will help explain it:

Maybe look at different breeds of dogs as an example. Try breeding a Japanese Akita with a Jack Russell... might be a bit difficult. Yet they both originate from the same Wolf-based ancestor. That's arguably speciation through evolution right there (as described in the picture above).

To be fair, a Jack Russel, Akita and a wolf are fairly more similar when compared to humans and apes, as they can reproduce because they're genetically similar.  If we and apes are just as relatable in make up to those dogs, we would be able to create a man/gorillia hybrd.  Just like how Lions and Tigers, Zebras and Horse can breed, because they're all genetically similar.   

I don't doubt that we humans might have evolved from something, but there just isn't enough indisbutable info about it to concived me.  If humans did evolve, I think we must of came from a breed long extinct, and nothing that exists in this time period.