Why Evolutiontheory is just a theory and not an Evidence

[Afghanistan2010]

Asalam alykum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh,

As a student in chemistry,it came to my mind.
Its very simple to understand this what will follow,and it is a punch in the face of those who support and believe in the Evolution but yet had not overthought it,this way,how it will follow now.


What is Evolution ?

Scientists "believe,think" that the life of the human or the homo started many many thousands of years,they say that the life of the animals or the living things (like bakteria,cells and and) changed and changed because of the environmental changes.All started by a cell(until now it is not known where it came from),this cell according to some scientists it came from a meteorit,others says it formed itself , yet some believe it was created by some aliens (lol),however let us continue.This cell formed and shaped and it was something different , then it continued then it became a worm , it continued .......fish , something similar to a crocodile or a devilsnake(explained by neil shubin),it continued ..... to a homo which is the forfather of the monkies and human.Some scientists has the opinion the direct forefather of the human was in central africa,according to european scientists that it started somewhere in caucasus (until now not known).
This was greatly explained by Charls Darwin,and others who followed him,and corrected many errors.



What is a theory ?

All starts by a hypothesis which is backed by evidence that the scientist found out,which a scientist starts with, he thinks it is so and so.Then he starts to try it out and sees what happens and he records his study . A theory presents a concept or idea that is testable. In science, a theory is a guess of the scientists,it remains until it is refuted.
A theory is not an evidence like in math.This is why mathematician always laugh at scientists,who according to them live from guessing and trying,and they live in a constant fear that their theory could fall /refuted/contradicted by others.

It was also explained in the Fermat's Last Theorem

An evidence in math it is a proof,which will remain for entirety like the proofs of pythagoras that a²+b² = c² it cant be refuted for entirety.

Is there any proof like that in Math or will be any for Evoluiton ?

No,there is no logic evidence for it,and it cant be proven for entirety that it is like that,it is an explantion that the disbelievers have.



Since i know Evolution it changed more than 20 % , first it was believed it started from Africa,it was refuted by some scientists,they said it started in Chechenya.While those in Europe believed and said the Neandertaler is the first of human,he was presented as monky,now computer scientist showed a picture of the Neandertaler which is similar to human of today.

[Afghanistan2010]

Further more :

There are new funds from scientists in Africa which were made some years back,according to the Science Magazin and the surveys presented it showed that the homo which lived 1 Million years back has the same head and brain size and the same characteristics of hands like that of us.

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

Asalam alykum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh,

وعليكم السلام

As a student in chemistery,it came to my mind.

Hmm shouldn't a student of chemistry at least know how to spell the name of his subject? Not a very good student, are you.. ?

Its very simple to understand this what will follow,and it is a punch in the face of those who support and believe in the Evolution but yet had not overthought it,this way,how it will follow now.

I don't support the idea of evolution. The evidence does. Scientifically refute the evidence for evolution if you want to be taken seriously.

What is Evolution ?

Scientists "believe,think" that the life of the human or the homo started many many thousands of years,they say that the life of the animals or the living things (like bakteria,cells and and) changed and changed because of the environmental changes.All started by a cell(until now it is not known where it came from),this cell according to some scientists it came from a meteorit,others says it formed itself , yet some believe it was created by some aliens (lol),however let us continue.This cell formed and shaped and it was something different , then it continued then it became a worm , it continued .......fish , something similar to a crocodile or a devilsnake(explained by neil shubin),it continued ..... to a homo which is the forfather of the monkies and human.Some scientists has the opinion the direct forefather of the human was in central africa,according to european scientists that it started somewhere in caucasus (until now not known).
This was greatly explained by Charls Darwin,and others who followed him,and corrected many errors.

If what you posted above was the explanation of Charles Darwin then he wouldn't be a scientist, he'd be a theologian or something less.

Are you suggesting that living organisms do not adapt to their environments? What part of the above-posted paragraph do you dispute and why? If you dispute all of it then why? What's your alternate theory about the diversity of life on earth?

What is a theory ?

All starts by a hypothesis which is backed by evidence that the scientist found out,which a scientist starts with, he thinks it is so and so.Then he starts to try it out and sees what happens and he records his study . A theory presents a concept or idea that is testable. In science, a theory is a guess of the scientists,it remains until it is refuted.
A theory is not an evidence like in math.This is why mathematician always laugh at scientists,who according to them live from guessing and trying,and they live in a constant fear that their theory could fall /refuted/contradicted by others.

Hmm at least don't contradict yourself...

It was also explained in the Fermat's Last Theorem

An evidence in math it is a proof,which will remain for entirety like the proofs of pythagoras that a²+b² = c² it cant be refuted for entirety.

Is there any proof like that in Math or will be any for Evoluiton ?

No,there is no logic evidence for it,and it cant be proven for entirety that it is like that,it is an explantion that the disbelievers have.

So there should be mathematical formulas for stuff in biology, psychology, zoology, anthropology and what not? Maths is a different field from these ones. You can't directly compare them. Geometry is about precise rules - unfortunately, there are very few, if any, direct comparisons in biology.

Since i know Evolution it changed more than 20 % , first it was believed it started from Africa,it was refuted by some scientists,they said it started in Chechenya.While those in Europe believed and said the Neandertaler is the first of human,he was presented as monky,now computer scientist showed a picture of the Neandertaler which is similar to human of today.

No one has ever claimed that Neanderthals were the "first humans". Secondly, some of the oldest human fossils have been found in east Africa and that is why all humans came from Africa. There is speculation about humans originating in Asia but the existence of fossils in Asia could also mean a faster than already imagined migration out of Africa. I think thisis the article that you might have come across. Even so, it does not refute the theory of evolution in any way or form...

Science changes. It's not absolute. Just because a scientist says something doesn't mean we all have to follow it. The works of scientists are peer-reviewed by other scientists and they are rigorously tested against the best-know evidence of the time. When new evidence comes to light, it is rigorously tested and then accepted as science. But no one can say that this is what I believe in and everyone should believe this until the end of times and whosoever disagrees shall be thrown in a fiery pit.

Further more :

There are new funds from scientists in Africa which were made some years back,according to the Science Magazin and the surveys presented it showed that the homo which lived 1 Million years back has the same head and brain size and the same characteristics of hands like that of us.

Which issue are we referring to here?

[Afghanistan2010]

وعليكم السلام




Hmm shouldn't a student of chemistry at least know how to spell the name of his subject? Not a very good student, are you.. ?

pardon me for my english and type errors, i study it in different language in europe.

I don't support the idea of evolution. The evidence does. Scientifically refute the evidence for evolution if you want to be taken seriously.

it was refuted many times by people like harun yahya and and.

If what you posted above was the explanation of Charles Darwin then he wouldn't be a scientist, he'd be a theologian or something less.

as i said it was better explained by charles darwin

Are you suggesting that living organisms do not adapt to their environments? What part of the above-posted paragraph do you dispute and why? If you dispute all of it then why? What's your alternate theory about the diversity of life on earth?

there maybe adaption but not changes in such form as it is explained by the evolutionists.

alternate is explained well by the quranic verses from the creator that created us and everything that exists.

the evolution that i believe in happens in the stomach of a mother.

Hmm at least don't contradict yourself...

By Evidence² i meant that the evidencesas we see it in math.

So there should be mathematical formulas for stuff in biology, psychology, zoology, anthropology and what not? Maths is a different field from these ones. You can't directly compare them. Geometry is about precise rules - unfortunately, there are very few, if any, direct comparisons in biology.

If you want to found out the date of some funds you do it by mathematical formulas,many things were descibed by mathematical formulas.

No one has ever claimed that Neanderthals were the "first humans". Secondly, some of the oldest human fossils have been found in east Africa and that is why all humans came from Africa. There is speculation about humans originating in Asia but the existence of fossils in Asia could also mean a faster than already imagined migration out of Africa. I think thisis the article that you might have come across. Even so, it does not refute the theory of evolution in any way or form...

the neanderthal was the first european human...it was believed that he is the oldest remaining to be found not the first human pardon.

http://www.planet-wissen.de/politik_...aler/index.jsp

Science changes. It's not absolute. Just because a scientist says something doesn't mean we all have to follow it. The works of scientists are peer-reviewed by other scientists and they are rigorously tested against the best-know evidence of the time. When new evidence comes to light, it is rigorously tested and then accepted as science. But no one can say that this is what I believe in and everyone should believe this until the end of times and whosoever disagrees shall be thrown in a fiery pit.

yes there will come many new discoveries,those in cern doubted the forumlas of albert einstein,what will come next ?

Which issue are we referring to here?

It was one of the latest about the human funds dated 1 million years old i http://www.sciencemag.org/content/28...2-7642afb9aec0

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/33...2-7642afb9aec0

[ScimitarXEdge]

Asalam alykum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh,

As a student in chemistry,it came to my mind.
[

ah well since you're a student of Chemistry; can you please explain to me how you can polymerize an Alkene monomer to produce 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane and what sort of catalyst would be needed to accomplish that.

Also explain what 2,2,4- Trimethylpentane represents, what are the significance of the numbers in front of it?

[ScimitarXEdge]

pardon me for my english and type errors, i study it in different language in europe.

Good I hope you can answer my questions on chemistry.

it was refuted many times by people like harun yahya and and.

Harun Yahya's refutations have been refuted by Mehmet Bekir, Inayat Bunglawala and other Muslims


look here how Inayat smashes every claim by Harun Yahya


Take two: Inayat Bunglawala v Harun Yahya | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

as i said it was better explained by charles darwin

In 2011 we have far surpassed Darwin's original ideas, we now know how things work on the molecular level

only thing that remains from Darwin's proposal is the concept of Natural Selection.

there maybe adaption but not changes in such form as it is explained by the evolutionists.

We have seen these changes happen in our own lifestime


Cambridge Journals Online - Abstract

alternate is explained well by the quranic verses from the creator that created us and everything that exists.

Another alternative is that God created evolution and through that we were created; because Allah(swt) exists outside the spatial boundaries of a physical universe and therefore everything he does requires no time; but the physical observe or experience it in millions or billions of years

the evolution that i believe in happens in the stomach of a mother.

But even chemistry shows evolution happens all the time; outside of just the womb of a mother

By Evidence² i meant that the evidencesas we see it in math.

I'm an Applied Mathematician, Mathematical Proofs deal with properties of mathematics; such as groupings, relations, mappings , set equivalence and existences.

They don't deal with whether or not evolution occurs or not.

If you want to found out the date of some funds you do it by mathematical formulas,many things were descibed by mathematical formulas.

A Mathematical Formula; describes an or predicts an already occurring process; it does not "prove" it.

For mathematical proof you need to use Induction

yes there will come many new discoveries,those in cern doubted the forumlas of albert einstein,what will come next ?

That's because cosmological arguments are much harder to verify.

Evolution you can verify even in a small lab; they didn't just make up a theory of evolution out of nothing and just stack information on it; the information and repeated testing and evidence built the theory of evolution

if you say "evolution is just a theory" then it shows you're not a chemist because it means you don't know what the scientific use of the word Theory means.

It was one of the latest about the human funds dated 1 million years old i http://www.sciencemag.org/content/28...2-7642afb9aec0

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/33...2-7642afb9aec0

But the dating of something doesn't disprove it's evolution

for example you can say the Microchip came out of the Electrical circuit, but but some people my say the electrical circuit is 80 years old and some day 100 years old, but the result is still the same. Microchip evolved from it

same with humans and other primates; the dates may vary but result is the same

[ScimitarXEdge]

Hey chemistry student

where is the answer to my chemistry question?

I asked you a question that first year chemistry students should know

you should be able to do it in 5 minutes. but I haven't heard from you in half an hour ....are you stuck?

LOL

[ScimitarXEdge]

waly ghalay chup kenay talib-e-kimiyah .. mata jawab raka

[Afghanistan2010]

ah well since you're a student of Chemistry; can you please explain to me how you can polymerize an Alkene monomer to produce 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane and what sort of catalyst would be needed to accomplish that.

Also explain what 2,2,4- Trimethylpentane represents, what are the significance of the numbers in front of it?

2,2,4 consists of methane,penthane ....it has three methan CH4 , to the second two methane bonds, it is from alkene they react with eachother to form a bigger molecules which are also molecules ...

it is also isomere of octan as part of the ALKANE

C-C(here are the two methane)-C-C(the last methane is here)-C

its 2,2,4 trimethylpentane

it is also called isoOctan(8)

this all is in the subject of organic chemistry.

[Afghanistan2010]

you should have read the story by the guardian til the end who won ...hahahahaha
i read it and i came to the conclusion that this inayat was in way defeated that he couldnt even reply further...this poor guy.

[Afghanistan2010]

I was not there , i have my things to do , im not so confused like you who stays whole day at home.

[ScimitarXEdge]

now let me correct where you're wrong and right

2,2,4 consists of methane,penthane

this is wrong, it has methanes yes, but it doesn't CONSIST of pentane, the reason it is called methylpentane is because, it has five C's bonded, but it is not made of pentane, because pentane is C5H12, but this is compound would have 5 Carbons 9 Hydrogens + Three Methanes

it is from alkene they react with eachother

wrong Methane is an ALKANE, Alkene Monomer is Ethylene which is C2H4

....it has three methan CH4 , to the second two methane bonds, it is from alkene they react with eachother to form a bigger molecules which are also molecules

Yeah but Methane isn't a Monomer of an Alkene Ethylene so this statement is wrong based on the question I asked.


This means you're not chemistry student; this is one of the first problems you learn in Organic Chemistry, after you learn functional groups

You're a liar

[ScimitarXEdge]

I was not there , i have my things to do , im not so confused like you who stays whole day at home.

Doesn't matter even with 19 hours of trying to find the answer you were wrong LOL

[ScimitarXEdge]

The only parts where you are right was that it had three methanes bonded, but anyone can know that by looking it up.

so I shouldn't say you're half right, you're actually only 1/10 right

So if I made this a quiz of Chemistry, you would have failed

[ScimitarXEdge]

you should have read the story by the guardian til the end who won ...hahahahaha
i read it and i came to the conclusion that this inayat was in way defeated that he couldnt even reply further...this poor guy.

I read the whole thing, Harun makes some idiotic comments like this one

The whole universe was created through the big bang, which Darwinists are by no means able to account for and which reveals almighty Allah's marvelous artistry. It is again the fossil record that shows us the history of living creatures' creation on earth.

Why would people who study evolution have to account for the Big Bang? It has no direct connection to Biological Evolutionary Science. Big Bang is something that is studied by Cosmologists and Physicists about Universal Evolution. The mechanisms that operate each are different.

This is how Harun Yahya was defeated, he doesn't know what he's talking about