Why Evolutiontheory is just a theory and not an Evidence

[ozymandias]

Also, Alchemist, could you please treat this discussion, and all posters in it with at least a little respect? There really is no need for all the name calling, and personal attacks.

[sanman]

I don't mind it - I've been in so many forum debates that name-calling doesn't even register with me, so I couldn't care less.

What I'm far more interested in is why he subverts reason to blind faith.

This is the opposite of cognitive surplus - it's surplus of ignorance.

[ozymandias]

I don't mind it - I've been in so many forum debates that name-calling doesn't even register with me, so I couldn't care less.

What I'm far more interested in is why he subverts reason to blind faith.

This is the opposite of cognitive surplus - it's surplus of ignorance.

It's not so much you, as Scimitar that that he mocks ceaselessly. It's not even that he is name calling -- it's the fact that he seems to think his ability to call someone a name is somehow evidence that his stance is right, that gets annoying.

[Afghanistan2010]

When you say "care about" - you mean to appreciate and have feelings for?
Or do you mean to maintain and sustain?
No special supernatural being is required to maintain and sustain the orbit of the planets, or anything else in the sky.

I was reffering to the maintaining what is in the skies and on the earth an all that encompass us.

Tell me if you control the night and the day or any scientist,but you explain it by these powers like gravity and gravitational attraction between the masses,but they do not know where it comes from,WHY it is there except they can tell you there is this and that and i believe in gravity,you do not see it as you claim that you do not see god so you do not believe in it, you argue you can feel gravity or you see the effect of gravity the same for power,you see the efects of power but not the power it self.
I agree you dont see god but does this mean there is no god?,its the same you will see god by his creations and what he has widespread around the world and universe,from the human and its skin to his language to the animals and all that what is above and below us.

There is no purpose to the universe, nor plan. It simply happened - just like if an apple falls from a tree, or a rock falls off a mountainside.
Your wishing otherwise will not make it so.

so you think it happend just ? , why doesnt the sun comes to an end just ?
why cant you fly just ? its is not even merely scientific when you say it happend just.

No man, that's just something somebody told you, to make sure you follow them. Faith is blind, after all.

it was to ScimeterXonEdgetoHell

Science proves its credibility every day, through the strength and reliability of its predictions.

yes "predicitons".

"It rained because God wanted it to."
"My aunt died because God wanted to see her."
"My tummy hurts because God is displeased with me."

It happens by the process which is explained by Quran and Sunnah which happens only by the order of Almighty Allah.


Newton is said to be the father of modern physics, because he was the first to see strong mathematical relationships in the behavior of nature.
By understanding and exploiting such things, Man has been able to gain increasing control over the world around him.

Tell me - how can you claim to know the feelings of God? Through what means?

Well, what kind of evolution are you referring to? If you mean emotional maturity, or knowledge, this is one type of evolution.
If you mean biological evolution of physical bodily traits and characteristics, this is a different type of evolution.
Yes, I think that both types would continue to occur, albeit at different rates.

the biological..

[Afghanistan2010]

So basically, you have absolutely no idea what evolution, modern cosmology, abiogenesis, or any other modern science actually says -- and that's your proof that it's wrong? That you don't have a clue?



Well, that's not what modern science believes -- but even if it did, that is still more likely than a super-being created itself out of nothing, and then created the universe.



Actually, many force others to call themselves Muslim. I have no idea where he lives. Perhaps he lives in a country were they still murder apostates.

are these questions or statements ?

[ozymandias]

I was reffering to the maintaining what is in the skies and on the earth an all that encompass us.

Physics.

Tell me if you control the night and the day or any scientist,but you explain it by these powers like gravity and gravitational attraction between the masses,but they do not know where it comes from,WHY it is there except they can tell you there is this and that and i believe in gravity,you do not see it as you claim that you do not see god so you do not believe in it, you argue you can feel gravity or you see the effect of gravity the same for power,you see the efects of power but not the power it self.

Because there is evidence that the laws of physics exist.

I agree you dont see god but does this mean there is no god?,its the same you will see god by his creations and what he has widespread around the world and universe,from the human and its skin to his language to the animals and all that what is above and below us.

Where is the evidence and the creations? Things are easily explained by the laws of physics and cosmology -- there is no need to posit a god.

so you think it happend just ? , why doesnt the sun comes to an end just ?

Once again, physics.

why cant you fly just ?

Once again, physics.

its is not even merely scientific when you say it happend just.

Good thing no scientist would claim that, then. Once you understand the scientific stance, then you can try to discredit it. Until then, you cannot disprove something you don't understand.

it was to ScimeterXonEdgetoHell



yes "predicitons".

...? Something confuse you?

It happens by the process which is explained by Quran and Sunnah which happens only by the order of Almighty Allah.

Why bring a god into this at all, when it is easily explained scientifically?

Newton is said to be the father of modern physics, because he was the first to see strong mathematical relationships in the behavior of nature.
By understanding and exploiting such things, Man has been able to gain increasing control over the world around him.

Tell me - how can you claim to know the feelings of God? Through what means?



the biological..

[ozymandias]

are these questions or statements ?

The ones that end in "?" are questions. The ones that end in "." are statements.

[Afghanistan2010]

Physics.

where does these powers (physical efffects ) come from,they are not "just" there from nowhere.

Because there is evidence that the laws of physics exist.

so this evidence is it not from the same people that are calling themselves scientists.

for how must this has come together it doesnt happens just, did you never rethought day and night ?,is it just senseless happening for nothing.

...? Something confuse you?

if something is based on prediciton,i would shake my hand.
there were many scientific prediciton but did they happen ?

Why bring a god into this at all, when it is easily explained scientifically?

Because this science how you call it ,is from the one you deny.

[ozymandias]

where does these powers (physical efffects ) come from,they are not "just" there from nowhere.

They are derived from the initial conditions of the Big Bang.

so this evidence is it not from the same people that are calling themselves scientists.

Huh? No. This evidence is from reality.

for how must this has come together it doesnt happens just,

Actually, it did.

did you never rethought day and night ?,is it just senseless happening for nothing.

Why does it have to have sense?

if something is based on prediciton,i would shake my hand.
there were many scientific prediciton but did they happen ?

I still don't understand that.

Because this science how you call it ,is from the one you deny.

Have fun proving that statement.

[Alchemist]

LOL

you are all really pathetic!

I feel like I am arguing with toddlers here.

I am saying there is no "evolution" in the species of bacteria because nothing has "evolved" and toddlers are saying 1) anti-biotic fungus were discovered before penicillin 2) prove that bacteria was found in corpses dating before the time of Sir Sanford.

Where was the proof for speciation so far? The counter to the argument that it is a tautological truism? Yet in the toddler's mind his blind faith is proof enough. You don't even know what it is you believe in which is why you keep avoiding the data. Instead of arguing the meat of evolution, you pull on it's hair - "oh well microevolution is proof of macroevolution and vice versa". More circular arguments by the toddler.

Ok toddlers, now I will teach you how to find proof that anti biotic resistance is not a case for "evolution".

Simply click here:

Let me google that for you


When I had first asked you to give me a case that supports the theory of evolution the first example that came to your head was anti biotic resistance. Two weeks later I hope you have learned enough on the matter to know that it is NOT an example of "Evolution", or "Natural Selection". Other than that you posted a list of species and now you are deceiving your self into thinking that every argument I made against the theory was actually in support of it. You are either 1) delusional or 2) ignorant.

I ll bet on the later.

[Alchemist]

I just glanced at your arguments with Afghanistan2010 and I realized...

Ozymandis, you are really a layman posing to be a scholar.

Afg keeps asking you metaphysical questions and you keep pulling epistemological answers...as if to say that he wasn't aware of those to begin with. Really you are just deceiving yourself and you are clever enough for your self.

[ozymandias]

LOL

you are all really pathetic!

I feel like I am arguing with toddlers here.

Are you arguing with yourself?

I am saying there is no "evolution" in the species of bacteria because nothing has "evolved"

You can say it as many times as you like -- you are going to need to provide evidence. Where is your evidence that E.coli has not evolved in 1 billion years?

and toddlers are saying 1) anti-biotic fungus were discovered before penicillin 2) prove that bacteria was found in corpses dating before the time of Sir Sanford.

You are the one claiming that the bacteria used in that youtube video was sourced to pre-antibiotic times.

Where was the proof for speciation so far?

I already provided a long list of observed speciation.

The counter to the argument that it is a tautological truism? Yet in the toddler's mind his blind faith is proof enough.

The only one using blind faith of evidence of *anything* is you. The rest of us are using evidence and science.

You don't even know what it is you believe in which is why you keep avoiding the data. Instead of arguing the meat of evolution, you pull on it's hair - "oh well microevolution is proof of macroevolution and vice versa". More circular arguments by the toddler.

What are you even talking about? No one has made that claim. Microevolution is *part* of macroevolution, not proof of it.

Ok toddlers, now I will teach you how to find proof that anti biotic resistance is not a case for "evolution".

Simply click here:

Let me google that for you


When I had first asked you to give me a case that supports the theory of evolution the first example that came to your head was anti biotic resistance.

Actually *you* claimed that the only evidence for evolution was palaeontology. I pointed out that this is incorrect, as modern medicine is plagued with issues resulting in evolution, and is a very well documented topic. You never asked for evidence, as you were claiming there was none, other than palaeontology, and I corrected that error you made.

Two weeks later I hope you have learned enough on the matter to know that it is NOT an example of "Evolution", or "Natural Selection".

Since you have yet to present any evidence that this is the case, why would my stance have changed? It is interesting that you have refused to change your stance in light of all the evidence and corrections to your misconceptions.

Other than that you posted a list of species

Which you claimed did not exist. You stated that speciation has never been observed, so I provided a list of species that we observed speciation in, correcting your false information.

and now you are deceiving your self into thinking that every argument I made against the theory was actually in support of it. You are either 1) delusional or 2) ignorant.

I ll bet on the later.

You can bet all you want, it's your money you are giving up. Since I have provided scientific evidence, and corrected your misconceptions in a rational, logical way that fits within the bounds of science, and all you have done is provide straw men and personal attacks, it is clear that the ignorant one would be you.

[ozymandias]

I just glanced at your arguments with Afghanistan2010 and I realized...

Ozymandis, you are really a layman posing to be a scholar.

Afg keeps asking you metaphysical questions and you keep pulling epistemological answers...as if to say that he wasn't aware of those to begin with. Really you are just deceiving yourself and you are clever enough for your self.

He is asking nonsense questions, for instance "what is maintaining the skies and the the earth?" or "why doesn't the son just come to an end?" There is no possible answer to that beyond the scientific answer that makes any sense. He is assuming that there is need for a motivation for these purely mechanical processes. If he knows the answers, why is he asking the questions?

[Soldat_Amir]

Heres a Fun Question Ozy, what if we nuked the moon, what would the consequences be?

I know it sounds like a stupid question, but I was in the car, and it just came to my mind.

Thanks

[ozymandias]

Heres a Fun Question Ozy, what if we nuked the moon, what would the consequences be?

I know it sounds like a stupid question, but I was in the car, and it just came to my mind.

Thanks

I will answer this in the 'Ask an atheist anything' thread -- as I don't see how this is related to evolution.