Warning: Gravity is "Only a Theory"

[Dagosa]

Try what again? Making you cry like a girl?

You’re still the one who can’t come up with one thing that isn’t influenced and enhanced by genetics.
Being a science illiterate must be a challenge for you.

 

[Dagosa]

Applied Science: When you can apply science to reproduce life separate from natural reproduction within the same species.....come talk to us about using FACTS concerning the theory of evolution.

Who says that gravity is only a theory? Anything that can be "quantified" via its "potential" and measured to repeat, time and time again in a constant manner as defined by the Laws of Physics is no longer a theory........its demonstrable science.

Applied Science: Try it sometimes instead of philosophy dressed like actual science. You are attempting to declare that "theoretical science" does not exist as a philosophy yet time and time again most theories are based upon the observable facts witnessed today.........as if the Universe does not change, does not use and exhaust energy........as if that which is seen today is a constant in the universe and applied to eons past to include assumptions in calculating time period BILLIONS of years in the past.

For instance. Wind, you can't see it, you can't touch it but its quantifiable and measurable as defined by its "potential" energy. All energy is subject to quantification as governed by the laws of physics. One cannot see an Atom....but its energy is quantified and its potential is used to create new uses for atomic energy with regularity.

You know what is not quantifiable? Love and Life? Man cannot create/reproduce Life...... Yet there are theories existing NOT BASED UPON FACTS but rather IDEAS (thought) making such theory more in line with PHILOSOPY rather than applied science. The origin of the universe is also an UNKOWN as far as the laws of physics are concerned. Yet some would call this philosophy of the BIG BANG a fact......even thought the best IDEA of Cosmology is that the energy that supposedly caused the BIG BAG.......created itself from nothing, directly in contradiction to the laws of physics. If you belief that, can I interest you in some ocean front property in Ks.?

“ only a theory “ is a slight of the word
Deniers need look up what a “theory” is. It takes decades or longer including the agreement of the vast majority of the scientific community for a hypothesis to reach the level of a theory in science.

 

[Hollie]

Real Science is Objective in nature.......not subjective as in (IT APPEARS TO HAVE........." appears to have exists only in the human mind.
Seciation: Always within the same species........... even in the example you presented of NEW SPECIES it contradicts your won logic or lack thereof. Can you not comprehend............a "mesquito" is still the same species its still a "mesquito" new or not, and the next example of cancer.......is ALWAYS developed in the same species..........read from your own presentation, "similar" event APPEARS (real objective science here.....appears ) to have happened in Dogs.......these (wink, wink) new examples of life are always confined to the same species. A Rose is a Rose. And you can't sprinkle sugar on a pile of feces and call it candy.

There is no evolution outside of species. You attempted to deflect without using Applied Science to develop life from non living matter. Everything you presented is an example of adaptation WITHIN SPECIES. Its existed from the beginning. A new species of mesquito is still a mesquito ........a new example of a virus or germ is still a virus or a germ within the confines of the same species.

Show us the applied science that demonstrates how fish have evolved into warm blooded land dwelling examples of life. You cannot because there are no such examples in the real world. In the real world.......living fossils exist.

I'm not clear you understood what was presented to you.

1) The evidence that evolution has occurred is overwhelming and comes from multiple different sources, each of which independently establishes the identical pattern of evolutionary descent. The sources for that evidence come independently from anatomy, genetics, biogeography, biochemistry and the fossil record.

2) The fossil record of human evolution from apelike ancestors is particular;y rich and well documented with multiple intermediate species between modern humans and those ancestors.

3) Different species do not exchange genetic information. One species evolves into another species by accumulating genetic mutations over many generations, until such time that enough genetic distance is established to prevent interbreeding. This is what the “ring species” demonstrate so elegantly.

4) The genetic mutations within species are “synchronized and harmonized” through the many well understood processes we together call “population genetics.” I am happy to also go into much greater depth here if you are interested.

5) There are several competing explanations for abiogenesis, and the current research in the field is extensive and fruitful. But the point remains, (snark) the first DNA was seeded on Earth by space aliens, or created by Allah, Maybe Vishnu or perhaps by a formidable, unionized consortium of gods.

6.) The evolution of all living things in concert with the evolution of DNA is established scientific fact.

 

[Dagosa]

You may have a basic misunderstanding of terms and definitions. Evolutionary science does not address the beginning of life, only how biological systems evolve due to external, environmental conditions and biological chemistry.

That’s for sure.

 

[Captain Caveman]

The whole of science is constructed from theories.

 

[Clyde 154]

I'm not clear you understood what was presented to you.

1) The evidence that evolution has occurred is overwhelming and comes from multiple different sources, each of which independently establishes the identical pattern of evolutionary descent. The sources for that evidence come independently from anatomy, genetics, biogeography, biochemistry and the fossil record.

2) The fossil record of human evolution from apelike ancestors is particular;y rich and well documented with multiple intermediate species between modern humans and those ancestors.

3) Different species do not exchange genetic information. One species evolves into another species by accumulating genetic mutations over many generations, until such time that enough genetic distance is established to prevent interbreeding. This is what the “ring species” demonstrate so elegantly.

4) The genetic mutations within species are “synchronized and harmonized” through the many well understood processes we together call “population genetics.” I am happy to also go into much greater depth here if you are interested.

5) There are several competing explanations for abiogenesis, and the current research in the field is extensive and fruitful. But the point remains, (snark) the first DNA was seeded on Earth by space aliens, or created by Allah, Maybe Vishnu or perhaps by a formidable, unionized consortium of gods.

6.) The evolution of all living things in concert with the evolution of DNA is established scientific fact.

I understand completely, you are attempting to define evolution within species as the type of evolution taught as fact, completely based upon the ideology of Darwinian Cultism.......that species can evolve into a totally different species of life. As I said, come back when you can APPLY SCIENCE and the SCIENTIFIC METHOD of observable, reproducible, consistent experimentation and prove that a fish can evolve into warm blooded animals, or a virus (non-living) can evolve into a bacteria (living) or a reptile can evolve into a foul/bird..............

Change WITHIN SPECIES is not evolution as instructed by supporters of DARWIN or the theory of evolution. What you are defining as evolution is not actually evolution.........all the markers required to adapt or change to meet environmental conditions preexisted any change. MUTATION takes away from a healthy intact strain of DNA it does not add new information. That's why when you present a picture of a deformed fish and attempt to declare that is somehow a fish caught changing into a new species is caused by MUTATION.....the healthy DNA has been corrupted.



Human fossil record?

Another example is the supposed different species of MAN..........the pseudo promoters will never consider that what they finding in the fossil record is a group of isolated humans that are a product of corrupted DNA due to inbreeding. The deformed skulls and deformed jaw lines, the twisted and humped over backs etc., Funny indeed.


To declare that a virus "mutates" and changes into a new virus is very laughable. A virus is made of non living molecules....its never been alive. What you are attempting to define as "evolution" is ALWAYS within the same species. Simply because a DNA marker might be dormant until required to sustain and promote the species via adaptation is not an indicator that it never existed in the first place.

 

[Hollie]

I understand completely, you are attempting to define evolution within species as the type of evolution taught as fact, completely based upon the ideology of Darwinian Cultism.......that species can evolve into a totally different species of life. As I said, come back when you can APPLY SCIENCE and the SCIENTIFIC METHOD of observable, reproducible, consistent experimentation and prove that a fish can evolve into warm blooded animals, or a virus (non-living) can evolve into a bacteria (living) or a reptile can evolve into a foul/bird..............

Change WITHIN SPECIES is not evolution as instructed by supporters of DARWIN or the theory of evolution. What you are defining as evolution is not actually evolution.........all the markers required to adapt or change to meet environmental conditions preexisted any change. MUTATION takes away from a healthy intact strain of DNA it does not add new information. That's why when you present a picture of a deformed fish and attempt to declare that is somehow a fish caught changing into a new species is caused by MUTATION.....the healthy DNA has been corrupted.



Human fossil record?

Another example is the supposed different species of MAN..........the pseudo promoters will never consider that what they finding in the fossil record is a group of isolated humans that are a product of corrupted DNA due to inbreeding. The deformed skulls and deformed jaw lines, the twisted and humped over backs etc., Funny indeed.


To declare that a virus "mutates" and changes into a new virus is very laughable. A virus is made of non living molecules....its never been alive. What you are attempting to define as "evolution" is ALWAYS within the same species. Simply because a DNA marker might be dormant until required to sustain and promote the species via adaptation is not an indicator that it never existed in the first place.

“Darwinian cultism”?

I think you still might be having difficulty with terms and definitions. While I supplied verifiable data for speciation and the relevant references, you have decided that none of it is true, completely without anything to support your claim. Are you suggesting that the global community of scientists are “cultists”?

Biologists watch speciation in a laboratory flask

Biologists have discovered that the evolution of a new species can occur rapidly enough for them to observe the process in a simple laboratory flask.

phys.org

Biologists have discovered that the evolution of a new species can occur rapidly enough for them to observe the process in a simple laboratory flask.

In a month-long experiment using a virus harmless to humans, biologists working at the University of California San Diego and at Michigan State University documented the evolution of a virus into two incipient species—a process known as speciation that Charles Darwin proposed to explain the branching in the tree of life, where one species splits into two distinct species during evolution.



Organisms evolve through a combination of genetic mutation and natural selection. The data confirms that. And the evidence still reflects a common origin for all living things from a common ancestor via a process of descent with modification, no matter how life arose in the first place. That is the problem for the anti-science crowd. If you have evidence for a supernatural causation, present it.

I do, in fact, accept the evidence for evolution in general and Darwininan evolution in particular because it is the strongest of all competing theories for the origin and diversity of species. I also accept Einstein's theory of gravity, the germ theory of disease, and the plate tectonic theory of earth history. Because they are respectively the strongest of all competing theories for gravity, disease and earth history.


Darwinian theory has demonstrated through a catalog of scientific detail the historical fact of evolution (assuming an understanding of the difference between levels of scientific certainty and the theories that explain them). Using fields as diverse as biology, comparative anatomy,selective breeding, geography and animal behavior, Darwin laid out the evidence and formed a working theory that evolution (descent with modification) had actually occurred.

Further, Darwin proposed a theory for explaining what we would learn to define as "Natural Selection." Evolution defines the objective criterion of "reproductive fitness" as the completely natural mechanism for driving biological change.

The “cult of Darwin” has withstood the rigors of the scientific method and peer review. So yes, biological evolution is not in question among the relevant scientific community.

If you know otherwise, you may wish to email your work to the journal Naturefor example.

If you are so certain that you have the data refuting "Darwinism", put your work before peer review and let's see how you do

 

[abu afak]

Fact: Life could not have evolved as defined by the "theory"...........not a law, of evolution. Why? Because Science has never recreated life from non living matter or witnessed through the science of archaeology (fossil records) any lifeform changing from one species into a totally new species (all the supposed evolution is always within the same species)...i.e. there is no fossil record of a fish changing into a warm blooded creature, no record of a cat (feline) that has evolved into a k-9...etc. and especially no record a primate changing into a man.

The original spark/abiogenesis is not evolution
evolution starts after life, no matter how it started.
As to changing species there is tremendous evidence.
In-between species/subspecies are found yearly filling in and making more gradual that change.
New species happen as subspecies get further and further away.. As soon as they cross a river that start and keep diverging, eventually far enough to become species.
Those tweeners are able to be and are predicted ONLY because of Evolution.

Of course, the alternative is to believe every species was CREATED about the way it is now.
In which case we are not dealing with scientific/taxonomic 'species' at all, but with creationists call 'Kinds': look-alikes.
Chimps and Gorillas have two species each but YOU would not make that distinction.
So you are a creationist and/Or are completely ignorant of the term 'species.'

`

 

[Dagosa]

Change WITHIN SPECIES is not evolution

Change within a species is consistent with evolution ….you‘re starting with a false statement ..
Deniers are in their bogus idea about not being able to see a new species develop before their eyes. Well, they are. You’re just too uninformed to know what’s happening.

All species are not changing as many are in an environment that does not support the change; they are doing fine just the way they are. We maybe witnessing some change due to covid and many unwilling to take vaccines and dying. Even Trump can see his support “dying off.“
.

 

[Dagosa]

The whole of science is constructed from theories.

And evidence, hypothesis, principles and laws…etc.

 

[Dagosa]

To declare that a virus "mutates" and changes into a new virus is very laughable.

Why is that laughable. Iron evolves and changes into iron oxide under some conditions and iron is hardly alive. There is a plethora of things that change over time under different conditions. Ever heat up a pad of butter to pour over your popcorn ?

Virus has DNA.

 

[Rogue AI]

The theory of gravity can be tested in laboratories across the planet, each netting the same result. The theory of evolution, not so much.

 

[abu afak]

The theory of gravity can be tested in laboratories across the planet, each netting the same result. The theory of evolution, not so much.

We have overwhelming Physical evidence for Evolution.
What in Court would be called "Proof beyond a reasonable doubt."
A great circumstantial case, plenty good enough to hang a man.
But true proof, as sci would use it is not 90%. Not 99.9%.
Only math has absolute 100% 'proof' (2+2=4)

Some sciences, like astronomy, are also not lab-able but observational.
Though the Hard evidence for Evo has been piling up for 160 years.
Many new sciences since, and all relevant ones not only don't contradict it, but some help confirm it. (DNA, Isotopic dating, etc),
And all new found fossils consistent in age/strata, and in finding tweeners that only Evolution (not creationism) could and does predict.
One fossil out of place of millions found could have blown it. None has.

`

 

[Orangecat]

Gravity is not a theory. The cause of gravity is.

 

[Dagosa]

The theory of gravity can be tested in laboratories across the planet, each netting the same result. The theory of evolution, not so much.

Seriously ? Are you kidding ? MODERN BIOLOGY IS BASED UPON EVOLUTION THEORY WORK. You have to be kidding. Every thing you normally buy in a grocery store, is genetically engineered.

At Every hospital most treatments you get from vaccines to cancer treatments to control of infections are founded in genetic engineering..

Geesus, the covid vaccine works on altering the dna of the virus. Computer science can use algorythyms originally designed for DNA mapping for other purposes .

You now have a life expectancy that is doubled by our knowledge of EVOLUTION that would not have happened otherwise.

There may not be a farmer in the United States that doesn’t use genetic engineered seeds . The fking common milk cow and today’s steer were fking bred into existence by evolutionary related studies.


TELL US AGAIN HOW THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION IS NOT TESTED AND VERIFIED IN OUR LIVES EVERY DAY.

 

[Dagosa]

Gravity is not a theory. The cause of gravity is.

Exactly. Theories are explanations that add understanding. .

 

[Captain Caveman]

And evidence, hypothesis, principles and laws…etc.

But still all theories.

Just saw an article in the news that they found a metal that does not obey the law of known physics. The reason being, all the 'set in stone' science laws are still just theories.

 

[Dagosa]

The theory of gravity can be tested in laboratories across the planet, each netting the same result. The theory of evolution, not so much.

Why are you going to a lab to “ test gravity ? “ Just jump off a roof or throw a ball. You test gravity when you climb out of bed in the morning just like you demonstrate evolution when you pour milk over your cereal and eat it.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Exactly. Theories are explanations that add understanding. .

Science is purely a subject that tries to describe your surroundings. These are called Scientific Theories. No matter how set in stone you think something is, it's prone to change over the years to come.

 

[Dagosa]

But still all theories.

Just saw an article in the news that they found a metal that does not obey the law of known physics. The reason being, all the 'set in stone' science laws are still just theories.

Why are belittling the word ” Theory” in science.
In science, NOTHING becomes a theory until it’s been agreed upon by an overwhelming number of science INSTITUTIONS using consensus using accumulated evidrnce and trials by all participating scientists after decades, and sometimes centuries. WTF are you saying ?

You talk like any butt head can wake up, invent an idea and call it a theory in science. Nope, scientist make a hypothesis first. Your post Is totally devoid of science awareness.