evolutionary theory wrang footprints

**blugiant** · 01-11-2010, 02:12 PM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Humano</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[b]Scientists simply change the theory once they realise the current one makes no sense.</div></div>

At least scientists are prepared to make some alteration/modification/qualification, etc, in light of new compelling evidence. Many religious people (though not all) still cling to 'certainty' based on what their religion tells them is the origin of the life. </div></div>

awl yu seyinn iss dat science weaken dem argument fii mekk itt easier fii sey dem rethinkinn dem proven wrang theory

**blugiant** · 01-11-2010, 02:34 PM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: f0rTyLeGz</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="font-weight: bold">Scientists simply change the theory once they realise the current one makes no sense.

Then the new theory will be regarded as fact (not just theory) until it too is seen as making no sense.</span></div></div>
"The Scopes Monkey Trial (1926), was an American legal case that tested the Butler Act which made it unlawful "to teach any theory that denies the story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals" in any Tennessee state-funded school and university.

The trial drew intense national publicity, with moderns pitted against traditionalists over the teaching of evolution in the schools and a Fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible. The trial proved a critical turning point in the American creation-evolution controversy." (wikipedia)

Look how far these scientists have taken us in the last 100 years...

Scientists are not in league, they follow the scientific method. Hypothesis and observation, and testing. Sure there are lying cheating grievous scientists. But their results are usually quickly proved wrong.

The thing about a god doing or making anything is that a believer's theories about their gods doings can not be tested. They are declarations.

Evolution, on the other hand, isn't a theory. It is a fact. Evolution won't ever be proved wrong by a scientist. There is no experiment, or set of experiments that could disprove evolution.

Did you see the new photos that look back 13 billion light years? Images of galaxies that were in existence soon after the Big Bang? (they are the smallest bluest dots)

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9..._cosmic_history

Photos of galaxies that existed 13 billion years ago... not a theory... scientists put this telescope together, and share the results. All of those distant galaxies are gone in the present. Every star, in those most distant galaxies, has died, and gone super nova, or been consumed by a black hole, or collapsed... every heavy metal on Earth was created in a super nova.

I dont know Derek... I guess I think that blowing off all scientists as blowhards, who don't know a fact from a theory, is a little harsh. Isn't it possible that scientists are men and women using the scientific method, plus their education about what scientists have learned so far, to figure out what is going on here?

</div></div>

dogon peeps pint inna da sky ann showed mzungu wey dem arginated fram da star sirrus b. mzungu scientists dissmiss de dogon theory untill wan day mzungu invented telescope strang enuff fii canfirm dat sirrus b reallee existed. scientists were wrang

wen scientist chatt bout planets ann stars den will chatt theory natt facts. deer iss addar competinn theories soo fii chatt bout facts wen uncertainitee still xxist iss flawed

evolution theory iss dat fish dat evolved inna land creature came fram out aff fresh water, poland discoveree iss dat dem sea creatures came out aff de sea salt water ann 18 million ears earlier. caan yu imagine beeinn aff bye nearlee 20 million ears ann den seyinn yu natt wrang. yu juss affii rethink ann refigured evolution theory.

**Dyoll_73** · 01-11-2010, 04:28 PM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: blakkgiant</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Humano</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[b]Scientists simply change the theory once they realise the current one makes no sense.</div></div>

At least scientists are prepared to make some alteration/modification/qualification, etc, in light of new compelling evidence. Many religious people (though not all) still cling to 'certainty' based on what their religion tells them is the origin of the life. </div></div>

awl yu seyinn iss dat science weaken dem argument fii mekk itt easier fii sey dem rethinkinn dem proven wrang theory </div></div>

No! I don't believe that's what I'm saying, but that will hardly matter with you anyway, so ...

**f0rTyLeGz** · 01-11-2010, 06:41 PM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: blakkgiant</div><div class="ubbcode-body">wen scientist chatt bout planets ann stars den will chatt theory natt facts. deer iss addar competinn theories soo fii chatt bout facts wen uncertainitee still xxist iss flawed</div></div>
What are the "addar competinn theories" with regards to planets and stars?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: blakkgiant</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
evolution theory iss dat fish dat evolved inna land creature came fram out aff fresh water, poland discoveree iss dat dem sea creatures came out aff de sea salt water ann 18 million ears earlier. caan yu imagine beeinn aff bye nearlee 20 million ears ann den seyinn yu natt wrang. yu juss affii rethink ann refigured evolution theory. </div></div>
Scientists didn't have to rethink and re-figure evolution... they had to rethink the placement in time of a creature that existed... 400 MILLION years ago.

Perhaps your confusion stems from the subtle difference between the meanings of the words "Law," "theory," and "hypothesis?" (hmmm what is patois for hypothesis?&quot

Here is a good link on that meshugaas. http://physics.suite101.com/article....thesis_vs__law

**rudemonk** · 01-13-2010, 04:31 AM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

evolution is a provable fact. it's overwhelming, the evidence staggering, the proofs are everywhere in our modern life.

if it were not true, you would be dead probably a thousand times over. in fact, many things which could not happen if not for evolutionary science being accurate and applicable to every day reality, I'm sure you applaud. Like overturning racist sentencing.

you are just a little confused as to what 'theory' means, and what the theory of evolution states.

this video from nova paints a decent picture.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dNGeXjpL1Hg"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dNGeXjpL1Hg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>

**rufian** · 01-13-2010, 05:13 AM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: blakkgiant</div><div class="ubbcode-body">wey bp soo mii caan bunn sum fiyah pon dem scientists wey wrang again

soo diss mean oyinbo evolve fram fish </div></div>
Based on the sense of smell I am willing to believe that oyibo is fish

WL:

Anyways this all is fueled on the silly notion that if a being has not survived today in some form it never existed

**blugiant** · 01-13-2010, 02:21 PM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sukuna</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: blakkgiant</div><div class="ubbcode-body">wey bp soo mii caan bunn sum fiyah pon dem scientists wey wrang again

soo diss mean oyinbo evolve fram fish </div></div>
Based on the sense of smell I am willing to believe that oyibo is fish

WL:

Anyways this all is fueled on the silly notion that if a being has not survived today in some form it never existed </div></div>

mii wass juss beeinn sarcastikk ann returninn dem racist evolutionaree fiyah pon oyinbo

itt based pon oyinbo silly notion dat tink dem can use science fii xxplain evereeting even dough dem ave prablem widd da idea aff a awl powerful creator

**blugiant** · 01-13-2010, 02:32 PM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">evolution is a provable fact. it's overwhelming, the evidence staggering, the proofs are everywhere in our modern life.

if it were not true, you would be dead probably a thousand times over. in fact, many things which could not happen if not for evolutionary science being accurate and applicable to every day reality, I'm sure you applaud. Like overturning racist sentencing.

you are just a little confused as to what 'theory' means, and what the theory of evolution states.

this video from nova paints a decent picture.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dNGeXjpL1Hg"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dNGeXjpL1Hg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
</div></div>

evolution iss natt a proven facts ann dat wat de discovery aff da footprints prove. da onlee way yu caan argue itt a proven facts iss fii accept science definition aff wat a fact is ann den cantinualee keep changinn da "facts" wen flaws widd accepted theories iss discover. evolution theory just like creation theory ar natt fact cah wii lack da knowledge fii understand evereeting

similar to 40legz argument bout scientifix definition aff theory as de onlee definition aff theory.

**rudemonk** · 01-13-2010, 03:03 PM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: blakkgiant</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">evolution is a provable fact. it's overwhelming, the evidence staggering, the proofs are everywhere in our modern life.

if it were not true, you would be dead probably a thousand times over. in fact, many things which could not happen if not for evolutionary science being accurate and applicable to every day reality, I'm sure you applaud. Like overturning racist sentencing.

you are just a little confused as to what 'theory' means, and what the theory of evolution states.

this video from nova paints a decent picture.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dNGeXjpL1Hg"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dNGeXjpL1Hg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
</div></div>

evolution iss natt a proven facts ann dat wat de discovery aff da footprints prove. da onlee way yu caan argue itt a proven facts iss fii accept science definition aff wat a fact is ann den cantinualee keep changinn da "facts" wen flaws widd accepted theories iss discover. evolution theory just like creation theory ar natt fact cah wii lack da knowledge fii understand evereeting

similar to 40legz argument bout scientifix definition aff theory as de onlee definition aff theory. </div></div>

that's why you are clearly confused. all the footprints do is shift a timeline. that's it.

evolution is a fact, like gravity is a fact. there is no competing theory to explain the effects of gravity- and yet, our understanding of how gravity works changes as new information is discovered and more is understood about the universe and how it works.

but gravity is still a fact. it's proved by dropping something or trying to jump off the earth. just like evolution is proven when examining speciation, or retroviral damage in the gene code, or making medicine.

creation as you are referring to it is not a theory because it can not be tested, nor can it be applied with testable results. you can substitute the cookie monster for god, and come up with the same results. why not zeuss instead of yahweh or jah. why not wankantanka. but if you substitute the bible say, or the egyptian book of coming forth, for polio vaccines, you get dead people in one case and live people in the other.

spend some time with the nova video. it will explain it and you'll see why what you are saying is incorrect.

**Derek** · 01-14-2010, 05:36 AM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

I just don't know how anyone can be so SURE of what was going on 40 million years ago.

I can't even get a satisfactory answer to who built the Pyramids - things that actually exist.

**blugiant** · 01-14-2010, 03:42 PM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I just don't know how anyone can be so SURE of what was going on 40 million years ago.

I can't even get a satisfactory answer to who built the Pyramids - things that actually exist. </div></div>

dat de rub. science peeps use empirical abservation ann canclude dat itt iss fact until proven addarwise. dat like de flat earth theory

**Derek** · 01-14-2010, 03:49 PM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: blakkgiant</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Derek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I just don't know how anyone can be so SURE of what was going on 40 million years ago.

I can't even get a satisfactory answer to who built the Pyramids - things that actually exist. </div></div>

dat de rub. science peeps use empirical abservation ann canclude dat itt iss fact until proven addarwise. dat like de flat earth theory </div></div>

Imagine jam.com pre Copernicus and Gallileo. Plenty of these when someone suggests the Earth is roundish and circles the sun - not the other way round.

By the way, did 40 million years ago actually exist?

**blugiant** · 01-14-2010, 03:53 PM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
that's why you are clearly confused. all the footprints do is shift a timeline. that's it.

evolution is a fact, like gravity is a fact. there is no competing theory to explain the effects of gravity- and yet, our understanding of how gravity works changes as new information is discovered and more is understood about the universe and how it works.

but gravity is still a fact. it's proved by dropping something or trying to jump off the earth. just like evolution is proven when examining speciation, or retroviral damage in the gene code, or making medicine.

creation as you are referring to it is not a theory because it can not be tested, nor can it be applied with testable results. you can substitute the cookie monster for god, and come up with the same results. why not zeuss instead of yahweh or jah. why not wankantanka. but if you substitute the bible say, or the egyptian book of coming forth, for polio vaccines, you get dead people in one case and live people in the other.

spend some time with the nova video. it will explain it and you'll see why what you are saying is incorrect. </div></div>

dat rite itt shift da time line 18 million ears ann even dough theory affii bee change dem still chattinn bout facts

science peeps luv fii gawn like dem assumptshan ar facts even dough den keep changinn ann revisinn dem theory. itt iss bout fear aff de unknown ann science refusinn too acknowledge dat scienctifixx facts is limited bye oww science peeps choose too define.

sah itt awl goo bakk too da beginninn aff thyme ann god

**Derek** · 01-14-2010, 03:56 PM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: blakkgiant</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: monk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
that's why you are clearly confused. all the footprints do is shift a timeline. that's it.

evolution is a fact, like gravity is a fact. there is no competing theory to explain the effects of gravity- and yet, our understanding of how gravity works changes as new information is discovered and more is understood about the universe and how it works.

but gravity is still a fact. it's proved by dropping something or trying to jump off the earth. just like evolution is proven when examining speciation, or retroviral damage in the gene code, or making medicine.

creation as you are referring to it is not a theory because it can not be tested, nor can it be applied with testable results. you can substitute the cookie monster for god, and come up with the same results. why not zeuss instead of yahweh or jah. why not wankantanka. but if you substitute the bible say, or the egyptian book of coming forth, for polio vaccines, you get dead people in one case and live people in the other.

spend some time with the nova video. it will explain it and you'll see why what you are saying is incorrect. </div></div>

dat rite itt shift da time line 18 million ears ann even dough theory affii bee change dem still chattinn bout facts

science peeps luv fii gawn like dem assumptshan ar facts even dough den keep changinn ann revisinn dem theory. itt iss bout fear aff de unknown ann science refusinn too acknowledge dat scienctifixx facts is limited bye oww science peeps choose too define.

sah itt awl goo bakk too da beginninn aff thyme ann god </div></div>

Hey monk, who is disputing gravity?

**Derek** · 01-14-2010, 04:07 PM

Re: evolutionary theory wrang footprints

<span style="font-size: 17pt"><span style="font-weight: bold">Scientists and their disciples, who blindly hold onto their beliefs and refuse to consider alternatives or thoughts that may disturb their comfort zone, are no different from religious people of similar mentality.</span></span>

evolutionary theory wrang footprints

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

ads