Evolution and the Origin of Life

[dmp]

It's still 1 in something, not 0 in something... :tng:

What do you think the chances are God simply spoke things into existance?

 

[Hagbard Celine]

What do you think the chances are God simply spoke things into existance?

What do you think the odds are God even exists?

 

[5stringJeff]

What do you think the odds are God even exists?

Greater than 1 in 10^78,420.

 

[MissileMan]

And I don't know anyone who does not recognize microevolution as a valid scientific theory. It, unlike macro-evolution, has been observed and verified.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but once observed and verified, it moves from scientific theory to scientific fact.

 

[5stringJeff]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but once observed and verified, it moves from scientific theory to scientific fact.

My understanding is that observed and verified moves it from hypothesis to theory. But it's been 8 years since I was in any type of science class.

 

[MissileMan]

My understanding is that observed and verified moves it from hypothesis to theory. But it's been 8 years since I was in any type of science class.

I've always considered hypothesis and theory synonymous.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I've always considered hypothesis and theory synonymous.

A hypothesis is a supposition that something may be true, but requires a series of tests to do so.

A theory is based on a series of tests and can be then used to make predictions.

So yes, a hypothesis turns into a theory after some level of validation. They are not synonymous.

 

[manu1959]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but once observed and verified, it moves from scientific theory to scientific fact.

it was once scientific fact that the earth was flat....

 

[Nuc]

it was once scientific fact that the earth was flat....

No that was a theory. Since it was unproven it was never a fact.

 

[Max Power]

1. Either life arose via natural processes or it did not arise via natural processes. (Law of Non-Contradiction)

(Oh you're going to hate me for this one)

Is that law necessarily true?

First, assume that there is no God.
Second, in order for us to even consider the question, it is necessary that the life arose via natural processes.

I seriously suggest you read up on the anthropic principle.

I mean... even if the probability of life arising is next to zero, it's still real, and the fact that we are considering it means it happened.
Is there any reason to believe that our universe is the only one? Perhaps there are an infinite number of universes w/o life because evolution never happened.

Or not.

 

[Max Power]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but once observed and verified, it moves from scientific theory to scientific fact.

The theory of special relativity has been observed. So has evolution (Shhh!).

They still remain theories.

Look up scientific theory and scientific law and you will understand it's an issue of complexity more than how "true" a theory is.

 

[Gunny]

What do you think the chances are God simply spoke things into existance?

Off-topic, but how come you are unpopular with baptists? Enquiring Southern Baptist minds want to know! :scratch:

 

[MissileMan]

The theory of special relativity has been observed. So has evolution (Shhh!).

They still remain theories.

Look up scientific theory and scientific law and you will understand it's an issue of complexity more than how "true" a theory is.

Whether complex or not, evolution on the "micro" level has been observed and verified, and therefore proven. Once proven, it's no longer a theory, it's a fact. Evolution on the "macro" level is as yet unproven, and so remains theory.

 

[manu1959]

No that was a theory. Since it was unproven it was never a fact.

at the time is was accepted scientific fact that it was flat....the theory was that it was round

 

[Gunny]

Whether complex or not, evolution on the "micro" level has been observed and verified, and therefore proven. Once proven, it's no longer a theory, it's a fact. Evolution on the "macro" level is as yet unproven, and so remains theory.

Damn, you said something on the topic I agree with. Will wonders never cease?

 

[Gunny]

at the time is was accepted scientific fact that it was flat....the theory was that it was round

You mean it's NOT flat?

 

[MissileMan]

Damn, you said something on the topic I agree with. Will wonders never cease?

You're bound to be right once in a while... :teeth:

 

[manu1959]

You mean it's NOT flat?

dolly parton flat maybe

 

[Gunny]

dolly parton flat maybe

Now that's my kind of "flat" !!!

 

[LuvRPgrl]

not that i disagree with you....but at one point science could not prove the earth was round yet it turned out to be so

Proving how something "IS" can be very different than proving how something "happened"

At times, when sleuthing, we can "discount" some possiblities.

For example, if a nickle wound up on a dresser, and we know for a fact that it was previously on the floor, then we can make that logical deduction that it didnt "accidentally" fall from the floor to the dresser.

Now, to get to the point of non life, (nickle on floor) to a living, breathing, replicating single cell organism, (nickle on downstairs dresser) its perfectly reasonable to assume that the nickle got to the dresser via an external LIVING force.

Now, while it is true that at one time we couldnt prove the earth was round, we also couldnt prove it was flat. We just thought we could, but not based on sound reasoning, but only based on human emotion.