Do majority of Republicans think Theory of Evolution is a fact ?

[saveliberty]

Guys, guys don't embarrass Fort Fun too much, I want him to hang around.

Sorry but he is just a gibberish pot head..

Yes, but he's our gibberish pot head. Granted he's the strawberry oatmeal packet in the four flavor variety pack, but still.

Ok..but I never get what this retard says..

He plays on small pieces of a subject he reads about and then attempts to act educated. Funny stuff.

Your a girl I always have a thing for girls..ok.

I can't fight girls ..

Please inform my mom I am a girl. Probably have a camera handy for the reaction.

 

[jc456]

I believe in the idea of evolution. Just like all science, anytime you think you have all of the answers, you find out that you don’t. There are likely to be a lot more things to learn about evolution.

Merely one piece of evidence, there are apes

What???

Well, if we evolved from apes there shouldn’t be apes today!

It has never been stated that we evolved from apes.

The theory says that we evolved from a common primate. A hominid that over millions of years branched two ways. On one branch was the upright hominids with ever increasing brain size. The other branch continued on in the ape line, with smaller brains and limited tool making/use capability.

and that common primate was an ape

Again, then why are there still apes if we evolved?

 

[MarkDuffy]

Bryozoans: Fossil fills missing evolutionary link

Scientists recently announced the discovery of a missing evolutionary link -- a fossil of the first known member of the modern bryozoans to grow up into a structure.

Lurking in oceans, rivers and lakes around the world are tiny, ancient animals known to few people. Bryozoans, tiny marine creatures that live in colonies, are "living fossils" -- their lineage goes back to the time when multi-celled life was a newfangled concept. But until now, scientists were missing evidence of one important breakthrough that helped the bryozoans survive 500 million years as the world changed around them.

Today, the diverse group of bryozoans that dominate modern seas build a great range of structures, from fans to sheets to weird, brain-like blobs. But for the first 50 or 60 million years of their existence, they could only grow like blankets over whatever surface they happened upon.

Scientists recently announced the discovery of that missing evolutionary link -- the first known member of the modern bryozoans to grow up into a structure. Called Jablonskipora kidwellae, it is named after UChicago geophysical scientists David Jablonski and Susan Kidwell.


Bryozoans: Fossil fills missing evolutionary link

 

[Darkwind]

Merely one piece of evidence, there are apes

What???

Well, if we evolved from apes there shouldn’t be apes today!

It has never been stated that we evolved from apes.

The theory says that we evolved from a common primate. A hominid that over millions of years branched two ways. On one branch was the upright hominids with ever increasing brain size. The other branch continued on in the ape line, with smaller brains and limited tool making/use capability.

and that common primate was an ape

Again, then why are there still apes if we evolved?

Because the common primate was not an ape. Ape's came AFTER the common primate.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Sorry but he is just a gibberish pot head..

Yes, but he's our gibberish pot head. Granted he's the strawberry oatmeal packet in the four flavor variety pack, but still.

Ok..but I never get what this retard says..

He plays on small pieces of a subject he reads about and then attempts to act educated. Funny stuff.

Your a girl I always have a thing for girls..ok.

I can't fight girls ..

Please inform my mom I am a girl. Probably have a camera handy for the reaction.

You post like one, I think your mom already knew....your cool

Just like the other on here..

As long as you post normal I like you

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Of course the Theory of Evolution is a fact; it's existential. It exists and anyone can read it and everything and all manners of things supporting/about it, and one can read it in all its vast detail or read a brief summary of it (though doing the latter hardly positions one to refute it). It doesn't matter whether one accepts it as an accurate depiction of how life evolved/evolves.

• Theory of the Origin, Evolution, and Nature of Life
  
• The Mathematics of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution: 1859 and 150 Years Later
  
• Mathematical Theory of Evolution
  
• Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection and Its Moral Purpose
  
• Evidence Supporting Biological Evolution (this is a summary)
  
• A brief guide to Darwin’s theory of natural selection (evolution)
  
• Brief Introduction to Evolutionary Theory
• A Theory of Evolution Above the Species Level
  
• Role of microorganisms in the evolution of animals and plants: the hologenome theory of evolution
  
• Beyond DNA: integrating inclusive inheritance into an extended theory of evolution
  
• Testing the theory of evolution by comparing phylogenetic trees constructed from five different protein sequences
  
• Hermann Joseph Muller's Study of X-rays as a Mutagen

To be sure, the Theory of Evolution as Darwin presented it has itself been refined since Darwin's day; thus merely reading On the Origin of Species isn't going to do the trick, as it were, for making one fully informed on the matter.

How Darwin envisioned evolution

The Integral Model of Evolution (the most recent refinement of the idea)

I wonder about that question, especially does Donald Trump think evolution is a fact ?

As for what Republicans think about the Theory of Evolution, well, I have no way to say credibly what they think. For all I know, they perceive it to be every bit as linear a thing as Darwin did. Hell, I don't know even whether most of them who'd refute it's validity have even read so much as the documents cited above, to say nothing of many or most of the myriad others that support (scientifically and with sound reasoning, not merely judgmentally) the Theory, so as to position themselves to be in legitimate mental state of comprehensive understanding about it to in turn refute it. Moreover, I don't know whether Republicans on the whole are fully aware of how the Scientific Method works.

As for what Trump thinks about the Theory of Evolution, well, I'll just say that as goes math and science (natural or social), the guy doesn't strike me as being anything even close to a prolific reader of rigorously developed content pertaining to those disciplines. But for his being POTUS, nobody would care what he thinks or might have to say about the Theory of Evolution. That he is POTUS doesn't make what he has to say any more meritorious; however, his being so can make his statements ominous, depending on what he says.

Evolution is a theory...not a good one but nonetheless...a theory. It's not a fact because the theory has many holes and a lot of missing fossils.

I wondered how long it'd take for someone to make that insipid remark. Now I know how long.

• "Just a Theory": 7 Misused Science Words
  
• The Scientific Method: Hypothesis to Theory
  
• What Is a Scientific Theory?
• Overview of the Research Process

Ive been studying stratigraphy for 25 years. I have no proof that evolution is law.

 

[MarkDuffy]

Did life on Earth start due to meteorites splashing into warm little ponds?

Life on Earth began somewhere between 3.7 and 4.5 billion years ago, after meteorites splashed down and leached essential elements into warm little ponds, say scientists. Their calculations suggest that wet and dry cycles bonded basic molecular building blocks in the ponds' nutrient-rich broth into self-replicating RNA molecules that constituted the first genetic code for life on the planet.

The spark of life, the authors say, was the creation of RNA polymers: the essential components of nucleotides, delivered by meteorites, reaching sufficient concentrations in pond water and bonding together as water levels fell and rose through cycles of precipitation, evaporation and drainage. The combination of wet and dry conditions was necessary for bonding, the paper says.

In some cases, the researchers believe, favorable conditions saw some of those chains fold over and spontaneously replicate themselves by drawing other nucleotides from their environment, fulfilling one condition for the definition of life. Those polymers were imperfect, capable of improving through Darwinian evolution, fulfilling the other condition.

"That's the Holy Grail of experimental origins-of-life chemistry," says Pearce.

That rudimentary form of life would give rise to the eventual development of DNA, the genetic blueprint of higher forms of life, which would evolve much later. The world would have been inhabited only by RNA-based life until DNA evolved.

"DNA is too complex to have been the first aspect of life to emerge," Pudritz says. "It had to start with something else, and that is RNA."

Journal Reference:

1. Ben K. D. Pearce, Ralph E. Pudritz, Dmitry A. Semenov, Thomas K. Henning. Origin of the RNA world: The fate of nucleobases in warm little ponds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2017; 201710339 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1710339114

Did life on Earth start due to meteorites splashing into warm little ponds?

...and where did those meteorite elements come from?

Warning: This is a slippery slope question.

Don't know. I was just checking evolution section headlines from Science Digest. Sounds like a crazy hypothesis to me, but impacts would be a way to add energy to the system. I don't think they are trying to say that the biomolecules actually came from the meteorites. That is not necessary.

 

[saveliberty]

Don't know. I was just checking evolution section headlines from Science Digest. Sounds like a crazy hypothesis to me, but impacts would be a way to add energy to the system. I don't think they are trying to say that the biomolecules actually came from the meteorites. That is not necessary.

So you take this information on faith, since you don't know.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Yes, but he's our gibberish pot head. Granted he's the strawberry oatmeal packet in the four flavor variety pack, but still.

Ok..but I never get what this retard says..

He plays on small pieces of a subject he reads about and then attempts to act educated. Funny stuff.

Your a girl I always have a thing for girls..ok.

I can't fight girls ..

Please inform my mom I am a girl. Probably have a camera handy for the reaction.

You post like one, I think your mom already knew....your cool

Just like the other on here..

As long as you post normal I like you

Just do us a favour don't shove it in our faces like Matthew trys to do and we will accept it....just be normal and gradually do it.

 

[saveliberty]

Just do us a favour don't shove it in our faces like Matthew trys to do and we will accept it....just be normal and gradually do it.

Matthew? Sea level is up to my ass Matthew? That Matthew.

That dude's iceberg is leaking.

 

[MarkDuffy]

Merely one piece of evidence, there are apes

What???

Well, if we evolved from apes there shouldn’t be apes today!

It has never been stated that we evolved from apes.

The theory says that we evolved from a common primate. A hominid that over millions of years branched two ways. On one branch was the upright hominids with ever increasing brain size. The other branch continued on in the ape line, with smaller brains and limited tool making/use capability.

and that common primate was an ape

Again, then why are there still apes if we evolved?

I already answered that one today or yesterday.

Why wouldn't there be apes? Why are there many different species of apes? Once birds evolved, why isn't there just one species of birds? Get the point?

The apes that became us left the other apes in the forest and went walkabout into the savannas. Apes stayed in the forest. Two different environmental niches. No reason for apes to disappear.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is no fact that the fetus is a human child. That is conferred upon birth. You can yell all you want, but you can't change reality or biology.

More semantics, leave the damn thing alone and see what the outcome is..

Your continued babbling does not change that you are wrong.

Typical intellectually dishonest regressive, can't respond so you throw out and ad hom and declare victory. You're too stupid to even be funny..

You are progressively babbling goofy comments. That which is true is not ad hom. Foxfyre could not grasp that fact, either. Your "regressive are ignorant" is an ad hom by your standard.

That happens sometime when I have to deal with an intellectually dishonest regressive liar, wanting to just play word games..

You have been shown up, and shown yourself up, for being a silly goof ball. A fetus is not a child. There is no way your babbling changes that.

 

[saveliberty]

I already answered that one today or yesterday.

Why wouldn't there be apes? Why are there many different species of apes? Once birds evolved, why isn't there just one species of birds? Get the point?

The apes that became us left the other apes in the forest and went walkabout into the savannas. Apes stayed in the forest. Two different environmental niches. No reason for apes to disappear.

You tried to distinguish adaptation from evolving correct? How is this not adapting to the new environment?

 

[MarkDuffy]

Don't know. I was just checking evolution section headlines from Science Digest. Sounds like a crazy hypothesis to me, but impacts would be a way to add energy to the system. I don't think they are trying to say that the biomolecules actually came from the meteorites. That is not necessary.

So you take this information on faith, since you don't know.

Scientists make lots of hypotheses. This was one from a recent paper. Might have merit or not.

 

[MarkDuffy]

I already answered that one today or yesterday.

Why wouldn't there be apes? Why are there many different species of apes? Once birds evolved, why isn't there just one species of birds? Get the point?

The apes that became us left the other apes in the forest and went walkabout into the savannas. Apes stayed in the forest. Two different environmental niches. No reason for apes to disappear.

You tried to distinguish adaptation from evolving correct? How is this not adapting to the new environment?

Adaptation is a behavioral change. Evolution is a physiological change. You can say adaptation leads to an evolutionary change, yes.

 

[saveliberty]

Don't know. I was just checking evolution section headlines from Science Digest. Sounds like a crazy hypothesis to me, but impacts would be a way to add energy to the system. I don't think they are trying to say that the biomolecules actually came from the meteorites. That is not necessary.

So you take this information on faith, since you don't know.

Scientists make lots of hypotheses. This was one from a recent paper. Might have merit or not.

I appreciate you are talking about this in a civil manner. My point earlier was actually that science ends up with no answer at some point as to what made the last thing on the list. What made the meteorite? There is some answer, then what made that, and so on. At that end point it requires faith that it happened on purpose or by random chance. That is what the argument is really about. Random chance is fatalistic. On purpose is optimistic.

 

[MarkDuffy]

What???

Well, if we evolved from apes there shouldn’t be apes today!

It has never been stated that we evolved from apes.

The theory says that we evolved from a common primate. A hominid that over millions of years branched two ways. On one branch was the upright hominids with ever increasing brain size. The other branch continued on in the ape line, with smaller brains and limited tool making/use capability.

and that common primate was an ape

Again, then why are there still apes if we evolved?

Because the common primate was not an ape. Ape's came AFTER the common primate.

LOL, we are still apes, members of the ape family; but we are not gorillas, chimps nor bonobos. We are also mammals, but we are not horses. We are also vertebrates, but we are not lizards.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Just do us a favour don't shove it in our faces like Matthew trys to do and we will accept it....just be normal and gradually do it.

Matthew? Sea level is up to my ass Matthew? That Matthew.

That dude's iceberg is leaking.

Lol ..i have to just tell you it's ok...

Just don't be a in your face douche bag..

Ok? We will accept it..

 

[MarkDuffy]

 

[saveliberty]

Just do us a favour don't shove it in our faces like Matthew trys to do and we will accept it....just be normal and gradually do it.

Matthew? Sea level is up to my ass Matthew? That Matthew.

That dude's iceberg is leaking.

Lol ..i have to just tell you it's ok...

Just don't be a in your face douche bag..

Ok? We will accept it..

If you want chocolates and flowers, we have a problem.