Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#74163 Feb 6, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
I would think that why they call them theories, and not laws.Duh.
Is this the same old rehashing you spoke of earlier, where you say incorrect stuff and everyone corrects you?

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#74164 Feb 6, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Still wrong. And you misunderstood him. The LAW describes the mathematical relationship. It is not the same as a theory.
Wait a minute...your science buddy just told me they were the very same thing...which is it?

You guys really need to share your index cards more.lol

Level 1

Since: Feb 13

Riverside , CA

#74165 Feb 6, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Your the one who needs to read a science book.
Oh i have read many, OK, try this, pick an object Hold it out in front of you and release it. What happens? It falls, of course. The gravitational attraction between the Earth and the object pulls it towards the ground. But, when we do this experiment, should we be talking about the Law of Gravity or the Theory of Gravity?

Actually, we should be talking about both. To understand why, we need to understand the scientific meaning of the words "law" and "theory."

In the language of science, the word "law" describes an analytic statement. It gives us a formula that tells us what things will do. For example, Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation tells us that "Every point mass attracts every single point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is directly proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the point masses." That formula will let us calculate the gravitational pull between the Earth and the object you dropped, between the Sun and Mars, or between me and a bowl of ice cream.

We can use Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation to calculate how strong the gravitational pull is between the Earth and the object you dropped, which would let us calculate its acceleration as it falls, how long it will take to hit the ground, how fast it would be going at impact, how much energy it will take to pick it up again, etc.

While the law lets us calculate quite a bit about what happens, notice that it does not tell us anything about why it happens. That is what theories are for. In the language of science, the word "theory" is used to describe an explanation of why and how things happen. For gravity, we use Einstein's Theory of General Relativity to explain why things fall.

A theory starts as one or more hypotheses, untested ideas about why something happens. For example, I might propose a hypothesis that the object that you released fell because it was pulled by the Earth's magnetic field. Once we started testing, it would not take long to find out that my hypothesis was not supported by the evidence. Non-magnetic objects fall at the same rate as magnetic objects. Because it was not supported by the evidence, my hypothesis does not gain the status of being a theory. To become a scientific theory, an idea must be thoroughly tested, and must be an accurate and predictive description of the natural world.

While laws rarely change, theories change frequently as new evidence is discovered. Instead of being discarded due to new evidence, theories are often revised to include the new evidence in their explanation. The Theory of General Relativity has adapted as new technologies and new evidence have expanded our view of the universe.

So when we are scientifically discussing gravity, we can talk about the law that describes the attraction between two objects, and we can also talk about the theory that describes why the objects attract each other.
neutral observer

Lake Worth, FL

#74166 Feb 6, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
One of the biggest fallacy ever propagated by atheists, is that to be a Christian one must know the letter of biblical law, which was directly addressed by the Christ.(Faith)
Athiests somehow care about Christian theological discussions? That one is funny.

“That's just MY opinion...”

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#74167 Feb 6, 2013
neutral observer wrote:
What is the point in denial? If you wish to say a creator was behind the big bang and guided the evolutionary process...
It is silly to pretend they are not real.
Anyone too dumb to know the Bible was not written to be taken literally... a bunch of parables strung together to form a morality tale... even the ancient Hebrews understood that much.
You seem to have developed some sort of theory about my beliefs based on your inability to understand my posts. My theory is that you are a f*cking moron.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#74168 Feb 6, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
One of the biggest fallacy ever propagated by atheists, is that to be a Christian one must know the letter of biblical law, which was directly addressed by the Christ.(Faith)
Anyone can be part of the christian cult. i hear people who say they are christians who don't follow the words of christ all the time...

when dealing with myths rehashed from previous myths, it really doesn't matter what you call yourself, does it?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#74169 Feb 6, 2013
neutral observer wrote:
<quoted text>
Athiests somehow care about Christian theological discussions? That one is funny.
Well, I've never considered myself an athiest i just have no religious beliefs...but i love theology and its discussion. watching people try to rationalize what has been proven to be a lie is funny as shit...like mice in a maze. but not quite as quick...

we really should run studies on them...

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#74170 Feb 6, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Then show me a statement that theory is defined as 100% certainty.
If not, then you are foolish looking.
I'll be waiting.
Theory as the highest accolade in science. It can be further worked out to ever more details.

Are we just arguing for argument sake...silly business.

It's just that you can find the perfect definition of scientific theory with a bit of googling.
It's not so vague that it merits even a discussion.
Since part and package is that it stands untill falsified, and then it would still be theory and the scientific method properly applied. Self-correcting and that's the beuaty of it.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#74171 Feb 6, 2013
neutral observer wrote:
<quoted text>
Athiests somehow care about Christian theological discussions? That one is funny.
Of course not.TRUE scientific inquiry explores all possibilities.
Alien Outlaw

Kansas City, MO

#74172 Feb 6, 2013
neutral observer wrote:
<quoted text>
We all know gravity exists. So do evolution and the big bang. There is still debate amongst physicists about how/why gravity works.
So it is still a theory.
Human knowledge has failed again. The Big Bang should be called the Big Mindgame. Its impossible to accept a theory when almost all the info is inadequate.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#74173 Feb 6, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course not.TRUE scientific inquiry explores all possibilities.
First you need the very first teensiest shred of evidence that some god, gods or goddesses may have possibly, maybe ever existed. when you find that first teensy shred of evidence, then any talk of gods in a scientific way will start.

get back to us when you find that first teensy shred....till then you might as well be discussing how the Easter Bunny created the rings of mars or how the loch ness monster started life on Earth...

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#74174 Feb 6, 2013
neutral observer wrote:
<quoted text>
Athiests somehow care about Christian theological discussions? That one is funny.
Thank you for biting.

In the first place, as can be seen here on several fora: christians do not know what they believe.
O they flaunt their believes in your face for sure. Together with all the foulmouthed behaviour and prejudices that i since have come to associate with it.
So to be an atheist in the catholic sense of just not believing in a trinity, or the proper god, is allready hard work.
But at least catholics do have a booklet telling them what it was all about, just in case they veer of their path.

Recap: you either end up attacking abstractions, which does not work.
Or you are left with literal criticism...very well since that can be developed into an artform.

And then you have ofcourse the fact that if you happen to be jewish you are automatically an atheist. The prototype the definition is based on. ;P
Same goes for a philosopher of the greek kind or any freethinker or believer in civil rights now.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#74175 Feb 6, 2013
Alien Outlaw wrote:
<quoted text>Human knowledge has failed again. The Big Bang should be called the Big Mindgame. Its impossible to accept a theory when almost all the info is inadequate.
Exactly what info is inadequate? please be specific...

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Indianapolis, IN

#74176 Feb 6, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Wait a minute...your science buddy just told me they were the very same thing...which is it?
You guys really need to share your index cards more.lol
I've already told you that Law is often used incorrectly for a theory. Laws are often used to describe a mathematical relationship. But they are not theories.

Back to the 5th grade for you.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Indianapolis, IN

#74177 Feb 6, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Wait a minute...your science buddy just told me they were the very same thing...which is it?
You guys really need to share your index cards more.lol
Read what Trekx just posted on the subject. I'm sure he can use smaller words if need be.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Indianapolis, IN

#74179 Feb 6, 2013
Alien Outlaw wrote:
<quoted text>Human knowledge has failed again. The Big Bang should be called the Big Mindgame. Its impossible to accept a theory when almost all the info is inadequate.
Depending on which part of the Big Bang you're referring to, it could be a theory or a hypothesis. There is a difference.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#74180 Feb 6, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Which is why 99.99% of working professionals in relevant fields of life sciences (biologists, etc) accept AND EMPLOY the Theory of Evolution.
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>
No they don't.
Mmmmm....yes. They do.(data to be provided shortly)
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>Now does a majority make something true. Science is not a popularity contest.
WAIT a minute! Didn't you just say "No they don't." when I stated (correctly) that 99.99% of scientists in relevant fields accept and EMPLOY the ToE? Now, you say it's not a 'popularity contest'?

Which is it?
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>Now, quit wasting our time, and stop with the futile logic fallacies.
I suppose you're referring to the fallacy known as 'argumentum ad populum'?

Does not apply in this case, as those being considered in the "contest" (your words) are professionals in the field of biology, and not that of the lay public. Thus your argument is rendered moot (as I will show shortly).
Yankee Yahoo wrote:
<quoted text>
I make no speculations, and have no opinion one way or another. I neither support evolution, or Creationism, or design, or anything. One must liberate themselves from all of these preconceived notions to really understand science.
Franky, you are lying.

I've seen your posts on other threads, and your bias is laughingly transparent.

The science is there. We have it. You do not.

This is NOT to say there is no Supreme Deity.

There may be.

But if there is, He/She/It used the toolbox and the timeline described by science, and not that of Genesis to do His bidding

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#74181 Feb 6, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Well, I've never considered myself an athiest i just have no religious beliefs...but i love theology and its discussion. watching people try to rationalize what has been proven to be a lie is funny as shit...like mice in a maze. but not quite as quick...
we really should run studies on them...
So by your own words, you enter a "scientific" study of religion with preconceived notions and bias, all the while claiming to be totally impartial.

You validate my point nicely.TY
neutral observer

Lake Worth, FL

#74182 Feb 6, 2013
Alien Outlaw wrote:
<quoted text>Human knowledge has failed again. The Big Bang should be called the Big Mindgame. Its impossible to accept a theory when almost all the info is inadequate.
What info? About what set the big bang into motion? There is no doubt the big bang creation event happened. That much is scientific fact.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#74183 Feb 6, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
So by your own words, you enter a "scientific" study of religion with preconceived notions and bias, all the while claiming to be totally impartial.
You validate my point nicely.TY
Well, since the basies for your myths were proven to be lies long before i was born, i was not able to honestly look at it without that prior knowledge. the same would fgo for you. why do you believe if you know it is based on proven lies?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
last word/first word. (Apr '12) 6 min Hoosier Hillbilly 5,201
WHAT???? A NEW word game? FOUR WORDS (Sep '08) 11 min whatimeisit 40,751
Create "short sentences using the last word" (Aug '12) 19 min Hoosier Hillbilly 7,614
raaxeeye77 25 min Amiir 2
International Space Station 28 min Hoosier Hillbilly 1
Word Association (Jun '10) 33 min Spirit67_ 26,385
OFFBEAT.keepAword.DropAword.2011edition (Oct '11) 34 min Spirit67_ 17,949
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 2 hr _hellbilly_ 152,773
BAN(N) the P0STER Above you !!! (Feb '14) 3 hr Just TLC 3,000
Post "any three words" (Sep '12) 5 hr andet1987 1,127
CHANGE One letter CHANCE (Sep '08) 7 hr andet1987 30,058
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 11 hr BLOODY__FATALITY 25,838
More from around the web