Warning: Gravity is "Only a Theory"

[abu afak]

Your proof? I'm still waiting. I'm not denying anything. You claim it's a fact and not a theory...so where is the proof?

You know...the whole frog/squirrel critter. The inter-phylum creatures...

The half fish lizard with scales, gills as well as lungs and wings....
Or a YouTube video of it all happening.

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
By John Rennie - July 1, 2002
Editor-in-Chief, Scientific American
[.....]
1. Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law.

Many people learned in Elementary School that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty -- above a mere hypothesis but below a law.
Scientists do NOT use the terms that way, however.
According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a Scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature.
So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution -- or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter -- they are NOT expressing reservations about its truth.

In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the FACT of evolution."..."

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

Opponents of evolution want to make a place for creationism by tearing down real science, but their arguments don't hold up

www.scientificamerican.com

`

 

[JohnDB]

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
By John Rennie - July 1, 2002
Editor-in-Chief, Scientific American
[.....]
1. Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law.

Many people learned in Elementary School that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty -- above a mere hypothesis but below a law.
Scientists do NOT use the terms that way, however.
According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a Scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature.
So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution -- or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter -- they are NOT expressing reservations about its truth.

In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the FACT of evolution."..."

`

Look,
I am unconcerned about the method God used to create life on the planet...

But when someone claims that they know beyond all doubt how it was done...I am curious as to what evidence they claim they have. Especially when it defies the Law of Entropy.

 

[abu afak]

Look,
I am unconcerned about the method God used to create life on the planet...

But when someone claims that they know beyond all doubt how it was done...I am curious as to what evidence they claim they have. Especially when it defies the Law of Entropy.

'Creating life on earth" (abiogenesis) is different from evolution.
Evolution/the diversity of life, starts after the First Spark, no matter how it started.

There is NO "god" in EVIDENCE unless you'd like to post it.
(and claim your Nobel Prize, and put all the other gods/religions out of business)
`Evolution OTOH, has overwhelming EVIDENCE.
`

 

[JohnDB]

'Creating life on earth" is different from evolution.
Evolution/the diversity of life, starts after the First Spark, no matter how it started.

There is NO "god" in EVIDENCE unless you'd like to post it.
(and claim your Nobel Prize, and put all the other gods/religions out of business)
`

Well, I have a theory that has at LEAST as much proof as yours does.

You claim yours is right.
I claim mine is right but doesn't discount yours at the same time. (I know that I don't know the means it was accomplished by. God said that He wasn't going to tell and I do believe Him)

Your faith in God (or lack thereof) isn't really relevant to this discussion.

All I asked for was proof that a theory was indeed a fact by providing proof that it happened in defiance of the Laws of Entropy. That's all I'm asking for. It's a unique occasion in the face of what is generally known and proven.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Your proof? I'm still waiting. I'm not denying anything. You claim it's a fact and not a theory...so where is the proof?

You know...the whole frog/squirrel critter. The inter-phylum creatures...

The half fish lizard with scales, gills as well as lungs and wings....
Or a YouTube video of it all happening.

You are asking for proof of evolution?

Liar. No you aren't. You are tryingtoo waste my time. Why would I do your troll exercise of compiling the evidence that has convinced every intelligent adult and scientist on the planet, and lie it at your feet so you can shit on it?

Haha, no.

If an adult like you doesn't understand the evidence of evolution (which also means -- and I guarantee this -- you know less than nothing about evolution), then you should be embarrassed 9f yourself. And if you aren't willing to go look some up for yourself, that is definitive proof of your childish trolling and dishonesty.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Well, I have a theory that has at LEAST as much proof as yours does

Another lie.

You religious nutters need to take your shameless les back to the religion section, where outrageous lies belong.

 

[JohnDB]

Another lie.

You religious nutters need to take your shameless les back to the religion section, where outrageous lies belong.

Im not foaming at the mouth....
However you most certainly are....once again proving that the Law of Entropy is fully in force.

 

[abu afak]

Well, I have a theory that has at LEAST as much proof as yours does.

You claim yours is right.
I claim mine is right but doesn't discount yours at the same time. (I know that I don't know the means it was accomplished by. God said that He wasn't going to tell and I do believe Him)

Your faith in God (or lack thereof) isn't really relevant to this discussion.

All I asked for was proof that a theory was indeed a fact by providing proof that it happened in defiance of the Laws of Entropy. That's all I'm asking for. It's a unique occasion in the face of what is generally known and proven.

Science doesn't deal in "Proof," it deals in theories affirmed by fact, evidence and predictability over time.
(see my post at top of the page)
Only math has "proof."
Science uses proof as 100%/absolute, Not as in court/that could hang a man "Proof beyond a reasonable doubt."
Evolution does have "Proof beyond a reasonable doubt" with an overwhelming circumstantial case.
Just that nothing is 100% except numbers. (as in 2 + 2 = 4)

Evolution has been a more confirmed theory with every year and every New Science in the explosion of sciences in the 160 years since. ALL relevant ones are either consistent with it or directly help confirm it. (Isotopic dating, DNA, etc)

God/godS not only have no proof but NO EVIDENCE. Nothing.
And if something can't come from nothing, neither can a god.
Your selecta-Magic thinking has been warped your unfortunate indoctrination.

`

 

[ding]

Especially when it defies the Law of Entropy.

It doesn't defy the SLoT from a thermodynamic standpoint. Creating order from disorder requires energy and since there are no 100% efficient processes disorder was increased even if order was created from disorder.

A good analog would be cleaning a messy room. The room is more orderly but energy was used to create the order and since the use of that energy was not 100% efficient usable energy was lost to the system thus increasing the total disorder of the universe.

 

[ding]

The universe is not ordered, it's chaotic, stars exploding/galaxies colliding and very Hostile to life.
The Galaxy IS a "messy room"..... and no evidence "it was "Hardwired for life." LOL
These are your religious views.
You can't debate me you little lying clown.
`

I beg to disagree. The very evolution of the universe followed an orderly progression; cosmic evolution, stellar evolution, chemical evolution, biological evolution and finally the evolution of consciousness. Each and every process adhered to the laws of nature. How does that not meet the definition of order. In fact science is the study of nature to discover the order within nature so as to be able to make predictions of nature.

But under no circumstance did any of the order created during the evolution of space and time result in a violation of the SLoT. Which is what my post addressed.

As for your belief that the universe was not hardwired for life and intelligence, your opinion is in the minority and not the opinion of the scientific community. It is YOUR religion that disagrees with science.

 

[abu afak]

It doesn't defy the SLoT from a thermodynamic standpoint. Creating order from disorder requires energy and since there are no 100% efficient processes disorder was increased even if order was created from disorder.

A good analog would be cleaning a messy room. The room is more orderly but energy was used to create the order and since the use of that energy was not 100% efficient usable energy was lost to the system thus increasing the total disorder of the universe.

The Universe is a "Messy Room" with stars exploding/galaxies colliding.
The Milky Way will collide with Andromeda in a few billion years causing unimaginable damage to any life within either.
Part of an 'ordered plan' I guess.
Both galaxies have clearly been been 'sinners.' Yeah, that's it.

`

 

[ding]

The Universe is a "Messy Room" with stars exploding/galaxies colliding.
The Milky Way will collide with Andromeda in a few billion years causing unimaginable damage to any life within either.
Part of an 'ordered plan' I guess.
Both galaxies have clearly been been 'sinners.' Yeah, that's it.

`

You are repeating yourself. See post #610.

 

[abu afak]

You are repeating yourself. See post #610.

You repeat your baseless claims endlessly
I repeat the answers.
There is no Evidence anyone "Hardwired the universe for life"
and no evidence it's an ordered rather than a "messy room.":
Stars exploding/galaxies colliding.
`

 

[ding]

You repeat your baseless claims endlessly
I repeat the answers.
There is no Evidence anyone "Hardwired the universe for life"
and no evidence it's an ordered rather than a "messy room.":
Stars exploding/galaxies colliding.
`

I explained it to you in exquisite detail in post #610. It has yet to be refuted.

 

[abu afak]

I explained it to you in exquisite detail in post #610. It has yet to be refuted.

And I answered immediately after.

 

[ding]

And I answered immediately after.

Which was you just repeating yourself.

 

[abu afak]

Which was you just repeating yourself.

Ditto.

 

[ding]

Ditto.

Incorrect. Post #610 was only posted once as a response to your post that you re-posted as a response to my post #610. So, no. Not ditto.

 

[abu afak]

Incorrect. Post #610 was only posted once as a response to your post that you re-posted as a response to my post #610. So, no. Not ditto.

Incorrect, I answered all of your posts, many because of your repetition of idiotic claims.

 

[ding]

Incorrect, I answered all of your posts, many because of your repetition of idiotic claims.

Cool story. So how long have you believed you live in a magical universe where cause and effect do not apply?