More like a LAWL

just take this minute, this one minute in your entire life, to think about just how wrong you are, and how potentially wrong about other things you might be. This is your chance to change.

Irrefutable proof right there

So wait, we must accept theories as fact, yet actual scientific laws are LAWLS?  Hope that wasn't your point. 

And you wonder why you can't convince others.  Honestly, you sound like a little like an extremist nut.  No real discussion, just "You're wrong."  So, have you ever thought what if you're wrong?

They don't evolve because they are holding an everstone.

=D

I sure hope you're trolling me. Because you're making it really hard to not feel intellectually superior.

LAWL = your answer is a joke.

Laws are unrelated to theory.
http://www.notjustatheory.com/

Laws state the case, and theories explain them. The law of gravity is how gravity works, the theory of gravity is WHY gravity works.

And yes, that means that theories are never proven. Isn't that wonderfully humble of the scientific community to say, "despite that we know some of these things are 100% fact, they will never be proven beyond theory". I often wonder how the pious can argue with that.

And yes, I always think about what if I'm wrong. I question everything I do because I need to know that I'm always making the best possible decision. And sometimes, I don't know the answer. I encourage the culture of questioning everything, and not faith, because in both scenarios, those actions become habit and it is better to question everything, than to believe everything.

Far from the case that I want religious people to give up religion. I want religious people to stop being sheep, despite whether or not Jesus is a shepherd.

That "minute" still exists, btw

What I think theprof00 is trying to say is that scientific theories aren't theories in the sense of the word that we use in our daily lives. A scientific theory is this (from Wiki):

"The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics). One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed."

In this case, evolution is one of those theories that are very unlikely to be altered in a substantial way, because it has been continuously refined over the last 150 years with tonnes of evidence. Evolution is about as close to a fact as anything can be.

Scientific theories and laws are completely seperate ideas.

A law does not attempt to explain the mechanism for an observation - it only says what the result will be. A theory is an explanation of an observation.

As such a law is not stronger than a theory, it's just different. Just like a theory a law can be proven to be false.

There is no other lifeform on the Earth that has the power the human race does to radically alter the planet and eco system to such an extent. I would suggest that the damage humans have done to the earth probably unbalanced many eco systems and actually drove evolution forward at a accelerated rate. Sea animals are a classic example of species that are relatively unaffected by human evolution as we have yet to really take over the Earths oceans to the same degree we've decimated land. That's not to say we haven't affected the oceans by the way, just that our main impact is damage to the foodchain and of course pollution which causes lots of damage to coastal species.

The whole idea of people saying "Evolution is just a theory" actually makes you look quite ignorant and uneducated. You are substituting in one definition for another because the word is the same; it's as silly as saying "Well, if people are so unhappy about being in the lower class, why don't they just drop out and take something else?"

Scientific Theorem is an equation which is made up of laws and facts, it is NOT the same as "well, I have a theory that maybe if I buy her a box of candy that she will go on a date with me."

In Evolutionary theory, the fact that some species have survived with little change for hundreds of millions of years is largely due to the fact that they evolved into a creature that is highly successful. If a species remains highly successful with its current traits, then mutations won't necessarilly mean a more successful species that will eliminate the current one if the successful traits keep breeding on. Not all species that have successful branches evolve off of them will go extinct either; ferns are a good example of this, all gynosperm plants evolved from ferns (non-flowering plants, those that use pinecones, for example), and angiosperms (flowering plants) evolved from gymnosperms; while plants have proven to be better adapted to many environments, they have not been able to out-compete ferns in the environments which ferns can thrive in - in fact, the shady environments that trees provide are actually much more suitable for ferns than other species of plant.

I used to have zero class, but then I went to college, and in my senior year I became an upper-classman. Now, nobody can say I have no class. I have several.

Great analogy. :D

It's comical isn't it.