Al Gore admits that Paris would not have solved "the problem."
- Thread starter WVPATX
- Start date
Huge difference between micro and macro and if you can't see that, you are in need of lots of help.
You're moving from science to philosophy. Scientifically (1) evolution (micro and macro) is proven and (2) it says nothing one way or the other about God.
Believers in Creation can point to whatever they want and say it was created but it's all philosophical discussion and has no basis in science.
Not sure what the Ark has to do with evolution. I stated correctly that macro evolution is still a theory, unproven. You believe it is fact. We disagree. I can cite scientists to support my view. You can provide scientists that support your view. If it was fact, it would be very hard to find opposing scientists.
"Micro" evolution IS evolution. Small changes occurring over vast amounts of time.
Please, please, please explain to me (in your own words) the concept of "macro" evolution
This is not about religious creation. It is about macro evolution. Stay on topic.
Micro evolution is adaptation. Very different from evolution from one species to another.
Then why is it called Relativity Theory instead of Relativity Fact? And why is it called Quantum Theory instead of Quantum Fact? Etc. You don't know or care to know about what it means to calls something a "theory" in science.
So an energy saving guy shows up at boomer's house promising him he can reduce his inside home heating/cooling bills by .2 of a percent before he pays off his mortgage (assuming boomer is indeed paying on a 30 year mortgage and has most of it still left to pay off)
Guys says it's going to cost boomer up front nearly 3 times the price of his house. Boomer gladly signs up for that deal?
Last edited:
Displacement of worth. Shall I use the glory word........REDISTRIBUTION of worth. And Paxxx, we are talking about a global effort.....not everything has to be about "America first". Terrorism can't be eradicated without a global effort either.
Then why do the universities, staffed with people who spend their lives investigating it, teach it?
I imagine your "scientists" received degrees in "creation science" from the University of the American Christian Alliance (or some such bs).
Theory:
a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.
"Darwin's theory of evolution"
synonyms: hypothesis, thesis, conjecture, supposition, speculation, postulation, postulate, proposition, premise, surmise, assumption, presupposition; More
- a set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based.
"a theory of education" - an idea used to account for a situation or justify a course of action.
"my theory would be that the place has been seriously mismanaged"
fact
fakt/
noun- a thing that is indisputably the case.
"the most commonly known fact about hedgehogs is that they have fleas"
synonyms: reality, actuality, certainty; More
- used in discussing the significance of something that is the case.
noun: the fact that
"the real problem facing them is the fact that their funds are being cut" - a piece of information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article.
synonyms: detail, piece of information, particular, item, specific, element, point, factor, feature, characteristic, ingredient, circumstance, aspect, facet;
information
"every fact was double-checked"
- used in discussing the significance of something that is the case.
- a thing that is indisputably the case.
Your definition of "theory" and "fact" aren't mutually exclusive.
That aside, why don't you just acknowledge that at least in the minds of the biology professors, it is indeed proven. Why are you digging up hydraulic engineers instead?
It is based in logic though, and there is nothing Scientifically that exposes fallacy more than logic. Logic dictates the design, uniqueness, complexity, precision, and intelligence obvious behind all patterned observations of things that cannot be duplicated by Man or anything else that's found in nature.
Science attempts to logically explain how these things are so arrayed and that inquiry is fine but inevitably leads one to logically conclude it is impossible to have just suddenly "appeared" out of no where in all of its observable splendor.
So naturally these Scientists (and you too Op2) very logically conclude it's impossible to have all been created.
Make sense?
Last edited:
As I said in an earlier post, the supernatural is outside the realm of science, which is an investigation of the natural world, or material world if you prefer.
The ACTUAL use of macro evolution BY PEOPLE THAT KNOW EVOLUTIONARY SCIENCE applies when examining the "tree" of evolution. It is for the purpose of comparing evolution over large periods of time and examining the massive changes that have occurred. It's using a "lens" to examine the evolutionary record. "Microevolution" is still the cause of all evolution, even that of your misused "macroevolution". You're just throwing haymakers in an attempt to knockout a PROVEN scientific theory that contrasts your comfy genesis explaination of your personal superiority.
I thought you actually respected what Christians teach boom? Just not this part of it right?
Ah, but if I read your bs fluff all day, as opposed to the legitimate texts and articles I read each day, I would reverse my own understanding of reality. Works for you, not me. I will however take whatever suggestions you have for readings in economic theory, and energy industrial dynamics.
And the sad fact for the proponents of the "theory" is that they have no transitional forms they can point to at any point along the process.
None. Zippo. Zero. Zilch. Nada.
Not one "transitional" form or fossil or artifact anywhere to back their theory. There are no half fish/ half birds (which would surely prove macro evolution) there are no Horse/men. No dog/cats. No spider, crabs.
Not one. Yet they continue to argue that every species we see in all of its variety "evolved" one from another and even changed within species into the varieties we observe today fully formed yet somehow have all decided to suddenly stop "evolving" simultaneously and leave no evidence of their transitional ancestors?
Brilliant.
I hear he also has a nice collection of Marvel comic books boom you can read to your kids and they could help you learn a few things.
So on this "tree" you mentioned boom, where are the needed transitional forms to observe that we can Scientifically conclude (since Science observes that found in nature) species changed from one form to another?
In other words when Birds became walking animals? When fish became birds?
Where are those transitional forms that by logic MUST exist if macro evolution is true?
I don't know how much more clear I can say things. Science doesn't address the supernatural. Period.
Yeah, I guess the entire branches of sciences of biology and genetics and palentology and others are all wrong. Too bad those thousands and thousands of people that spent their lives studying this stuff didn't ask some guy on a message board instead, he'd have straighten them out.
Here are some people that are apparently complete dolts relative to you.
http://biology.wvu.edu/faculty-and-staff
I agree with you on this Op2. But my question to you was do we therefore conclude logically that it is irrelevant to our existence?
Since we can't observe it or Scientifically evaluate it, it's non existent? There is no such thing?
This logically is a correct assumption we should make about it because we can't Scientifically evaluate it?
You are unbelievable. I'll write it again. Science doesn't address the supernatural. Period. That's it. No need to read more into it. You can still discuss it or believe it if you want but just keep in mind that it is outside the realm of science.
Why are you asking me instead of those thousands of PhD Biologists staffing out universities?
http://talkorigins.org/
Again. I already said agree with you Op2. Which is why we should not rely only on Science to explain all there is to know. It (Science) can't explain that, and there is a hell of a lot to it don't you know?
This is the realm I choose to operate in to explain a lot of sh*t that otherwise makes no sense to me. Like when I am thinking of my Grandkids who live way the Hell over on the other side of the country in Seattle Washington and then the phone rings and it's them on the phone calling to say "Hi Granpa"!
Or when I gaze up at the night sky and wonder why we just don't spin off into nothingness or even how all that sh*t is up there and we still can't even hope to find a way to travel to them?(stars)
I can't answer a lot of those questions, but in the supernatural world I surprisingly do find many answers.
Don't dismiss what you don't know Op2. It makes your mind feeble and closed.
Unbelievable. A thread about the Paris Accords and its merits, impacts, and likely results is allowed to be highjacked into another pointless debate regarding God.
There are some on here that try to end all debate with religious assertions, and those of us that foolishly try to argue that action. I'm an idiot, don't know what others excuse s are.
It's absolutely amazing to me how people of Faith aren't allowed to express their views or advocate for their beliefs, yet those who believe in essentially nothing or more likely virtually almost anything else, can say whatever they want, however they want to say it, whenever they prefer to express it, and no one has a right to even so much as question either their veracity or more possibly their lunacy.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
A friend said he heard yesterday at the Spring game that............
- Latest: bobbyboucheeer
-
-
