Darwins Theory of Evolution is not Fact, it is merely Theory

Alright, so I have been arguing on another thread about the Darwins Theory of Evolution. For whatever the reason I got a lot of hate for saying Darwin's Theory is only Theory as of now and cannot be considered fact. Now I don't get why some people cannot accept the fact, that this is just a Theory and not fact, for example, they told me God/Religion has yet to be proven a fact. Quite frankly, that is true, but it does not bother me that it is not fact, as long as it cannot be proven/disproven it does not matter. I recognize Micro Evolution and all that in Biology as fact, but Darwin's Theory has yet to be proven, despite how many Scientists support it that does not make it fact.

Alright, so would you agree with me that Darwin's Evolution is just a Theory and has yet to be proven? Can you accept that this Theory cannot be proven nor disproven?

Edit:

12 pages later and still we are going in circles.

Argue Amongst yourselves I am done here. I have been attacked and insulted 1 to many times, just because you don't like what I have to say.

I accept Darwin's Evolution as Theory, I will not accept it as fact until it is proven to be fact.

Um, duh?

*backs out of the thread before ugliness commences*

Um, duh?

Necrifer

Apparently not, which is why I made the topic. : /

It is shocking if I am being honest.

Gravity is technically still a theory 99% of scientists have chosen is the best idea we have come up with for a lot of things that happen in this universe. So we label it as a Law. It's technically not fact. It just has piles and piles of evidence supporting it and is generally accepted by the scientific community to be the law governing the state of large objects in the world. The law of gravity however holds absolutely no merit when on the sub-atomic level when dealing with the strong and weak nuclear forces that hold atoms together. But it works pretty damn good for everything else. Same with a lot of phsycis and math.

The Theory of Evolution also has piles and piles of evidence from thousands of independent sources from across the planet who do scientific experiments and make general observations that can be redone over and over and over with the same results.

The only other theory of how humans came into being that is generally accepted in the western world is supported by 1 book with no observations, no reproducible scientific experiments, or any sorts of measurementsat all. It's still accepted based upon pure faith. There is absolutely no science behind it.

"Since you can't disprove it, it must be right" is not science, it's a argumentative fallacy that makes no sense. That's what the other theory soley relies on in the scientific community. Which is completely incorrect.

Yes, it is a theory, but it's one with a lot of evidence and I believe in it. Many people misinterpret parts of it - his theory was on natural selection.

Gravity is technically still a theory 99% of scientists have chosen is the best idea we have come up with for a lot of things that happen in this universe. So we label it as a Law. It's technically not fact. It just has piles and piles of evidence supporting it.

The Theory of Evolution also has piles and piles of evidence from thousands of independent sources from across the planet who do scientific experiments and make general observations that can be redone over and over and over with the same results.

The only other theory of how humans came into being that is generally accepted in the western world is supported by 1 book with no observations, no reproducible scientific experiments, or any sorts of measurementsat all. It's still accepted based upon pure faith. There is absolutely no science behind it.

"Since you can't disprove it, it must be right" is not science, it's a argumentative fallacy that makes no sense. That's what the other theory soley relies on in the scientific community. Which is completely incorrect.

Wasdie

Nothing is fact, but somethings have so much proof backing them up, that they are taken as such.

It's a theory but it makes sense.

It is a F****** SCIENTIFIC THEORY SUPPORTED BY A LARGE AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE, if you would pick up a damn science text book you might learn the difference between a regular theory and a scientific theory.

Ingenemployee

Gravity is a theory, the cell theory is a theory, so is the notion that matter is comprised of atoms.

It's quite easy to identify scientific illiterates like yourself who cannot even grasp the idea of a scientific theory. It's not used in the everyday definition similar to a guess or hint. A Theory in science is the highest form of truth you can attain.

Just because there is a lot of research and people behind it does not make it fact. I am sorry, but if we are playing that game, religion wins because of the Bible. How much older is the Bible, how many people took part in it compared to the number of people alive at the time, imagine the effort and thought that was put into it. As far as I am concerned Darwin's Theory is no closer to fact than the Bible and God, why, because they cannot be proven nor disproven.

I still don't get why people fight this there is no such thing as close to fact, it is either fact or it isn't. Darwin's Theory of Evolution isn't fact, what is so troubling about that?

Gravity is technically still a theory 99% of scientists have chosen is the best idea we have come up with for a lot of things that happen in this universe. So we label it as a Law. It's technically not fact. It just has piles and piles of evidence supporting it and is generally accepted by the scientific community to be the law governing the state of large objects in the world. The law of gravity however holds absolutely no merit when on the sub-atomic level when dealing with the strong and weak nuclear forces that hold atoms together. But it works pretty damn good for everything else. Same with a lot of phsycis and math.

The Theory of Evolution also has piles and piles of evidence from thousands of independent sources from across the planet who do scientific experiments and make general observations that can be redone over and over and over with the same results.

The only other theory of how humans came into being that is generally accepted in the western world is supported by 1 book with no observations, no reproducible scientific experiments, or any sorts of measurementsat all. It's still accepted based upon pure faith. There is absolutely no science behind it.

"Since you can't disprove it, it must be right" is not science, it's a argumentative fallacy that makes no sense. That's what the other theory soley relies on in the scientific community. Which is completely incorrect.

Wasdie

99% of scientists? I would wonder what 1% doubt gravity? I don't believe it. I could understand how a scientist could doubt evolution for religious reasons, but as far as I'm concerned, no religion is in contradiction with gravity, unless there's some religion I'm not thinking of where God pushes us down, rather than us being attracted to the center of the Earth.

Yes, it is a theory, but it's one with a lot of evidence and I believe in it. Many people misinterpret parts of it - his theory was on natural selection.

sonicare

I have a great difficulty understanding natural selection and how it performs as the mechanics of evolution.[

[QUOTE="Ingenemployee"]

It is a F****** SCIENTIFIC THEORY SUPPORTED BY A LARGE AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE, if you would pick up a damn science text book you might learn the difference between a regular theory and a scientific theory.

Wii4Fun

Relax...all he is saying is that it is a theory and not a fact...:|

Gravity is a theory, the cell theory is a theory, so is the notion that matter is comprised of atoms.

It's quite easy to identify scientific illiterates like yourself who cannot even grasp the idea of a scientific theory. It's not used in the everyday definition similar to a guess or hint. A Theory in science is the highest form of truth you can attain.

HoolaHoopMan

That makes it no better than the Theory of God brought forth by organized religion. Stop your bias assumptions, face the facts, a theory is theory. Like it or not, Evolution does not hold more truth than Religion, they are on the level playing ground of cannot be proven nor disproven.

[QUOTE="Wii4Fun"]

[QUOTE="Ingenemployee"]

It is a F****** SCIENTIFIC THEORY SUPPORTED BY A LARGE AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE, if you would pick up a damn science text book you might learn the difference between a regular theory and a scientific theory.

HoolaHoopMan

Relax...all he is saying is that it is a theory and not a fact...:|

The Bible is comprised of Historical Facts... See what I mean...

Just because there is a lot of research and people behind it does not make it fact. I am sorry, but if we are playing that game, religion wins because of the Bible. How much older is the Bible, how many people took part in it compared to the number of people alive at the time, imagine the effort and thought that was put into it. As far as I am concerned Darwin's Theory is no closer to fact than the Bible and God, why, because they cannot be proven nor disproven.

I still don't get why people fight this there is no such thing as close to fact, it is either fact or it isn't. Darwin's Theory of Evolution isn't fact, what is so troubling about that?

VisigothSaxon

*Head explodes at lack of logic in post*

A scientific theory is the explanation for a large body of facts. It isn't trying to be a fact in itself, but explain the facts that we see. It's the highest point.

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]

Gravity is a theory, the cell theory is a theory, so is the notion that matter is comprised of atoms.

It's quite easy to identify scientific illiterates like yourself who cannot even grasp the idea of a scientific theory. It's not used in the everyday definition similar to a guess or hint. A Theory in science is the highest form of truth you can attain.

VisigothSaxon

That makes it no better than the Theory of God brought forth by organized religion. Stop your bias assumptions, face the facts, a theory is theory. Like it or not, Evolution does not hold more truth than Religion, they are on the level playing ground of cannot be proven nor disproven.

Yes , yes , yes , YES! It's a "theory" (so as everything else) but finally someone accepts that it could be disproven in future , or maybe not , who knows ?gubrushadow

Exactly who knows what will be proven/disproven in the future. I don't get what these people are afraid of, I guess you guys doubt the Theory of Evolution then, if you get so defensive over it. I don't get defensive over the fact that Religion and God is not proven, I accept that fact and it does not bother me by any means.

What does bother me is ignorance...

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="Wii4Fun"]

Relax...all he is saying is that it is a theory and not a fact...:|

VisigothSaxon

The Bible is comprised of Historical Facts... See what I mean...

Like Noah's ark and the Garden of Eden right?

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="Wii4Fun"]

Relax...all he is saying is that it is a theory and not a fact...:|

VisigothSaxon

The Bible is comprised of Historical Facts... See what I mean...

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="Wii4Fun"]

Relax...all he is saying is that it is a theory and not a fact...:|

VisigothSaxon

The Bible is comprised of Historical Facts... See what I mean...

well it IS a theory , the man was just writing what he thought , people have read it and believed it , others didnt , thats it !FMAB_GTO

Jesus people THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "Theory" and "Scientific theory".. Evolution.. Scientific theory is the highest title the science community gives to it.. Within the community evolution is seen as a fact.. It did happen, there is entirely too much evidence and no counter evidence to go against it.. What is being argued is how and why it happened.

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]

Gravity is a theory, the cell theory is a theory, so is the notion that matter is comprised of atoms.

It's quite easy to identify scientific illiterates like yourself who cannot even grasp the idea of a scientific theory. It's not used in the everyday definition similar to a guess or hint. A Theory in science is the highest form of truth you can attain.

VisigothSaxon

That makes it no better than the Theory of God brought forth by organized religion. Stop your bias assumptions, face the facts, a theory is theory. Like it or not, Evolution does not hold more truth than Religion, they are on the level playing ground of cannot be proven nor disproven.

[QUOTE="VisigothSaxon"]

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"] Scientific theories are comprised of facts. He's more than obliged to rage when statements like yours are made. redstorm72

The Bible is comprised of Historical Facts... See what I mean...

Like Noah's ark and the Garden of Eden right?

More like Jesus for example, a known and proven Historical Person. The crucifixion as well. I mean you can go on and on, people agree the Bible contains many historical facts, the big question is if those were done in a Divine manner or some way we don't understand. Just like people agree Jesus existed, they cannot prove if he was the Son of God. There is a boat frozen in the Alps that people think may be Noah's ark because of the time period it is from.

Just because there is a lot of research and people behind it does not make it fact. I am sorry, but if we are playing that game, religion wins because of the Bible. How much older is the Bible, how many people took part in it compared to the number of people alive at the time, imagine the effort and thought that was put into it. As far as I am concerned Darwin's Theory is no closer to fact than the Bible and God, why, because they cannot be proven nor disproven.

I still don't get why people fight this there is no such thing as close to fact, it is either fact or it isn't. Darwin's Theory of Evolution isn't fact, what is so troubling about that?

VisigothSaxon

Again read what I said. Gravity isn't a fact. The chemical composition of the air you're breathing isn't a fact. Hell the very science that I'm using right now to communicate to you isn't a fact. They are all just theories that seem to work very well in our current world.

You're right that evolution isn't a fact, but that doesn't make any other laws and theories we generally accept to be right invalid because we can't prove without a shadow of a doubt that they will always work in every since comprehendsible scenario.

We can't prove there isn't a God directly, but we have massive amounts of evidence supporting theories that contradict nearly everything written about the physical world in the Bible. Eventually you just have to start looking at what we know and what we don't know, the evidence we have and what we don't have, and making logical decision on which to believe or not.

If you choose to believe the side with absolutely no evidence outside of the writings of old dead men, then that is your choice. Don't be alarmed when the people who choose to believe the other side come back with tons of evidence supporting theirs. At that point you have to either put up or shut up.

Just because there is a lot of research and people behind it does not make it fact. I am sorry, but if we are playing that game, religion wins because of the Bible. How much older is the Bible, how many people took part in it compared to the number of people alive at the time, imagine the effort and thought that was put into it. As far as I am concerned Darwin's Theory is no closer to fact than the Bible and God, why, because they cannot be proven nor disproven.

I still don't get why people fight this there is no such thing as close to fact, it is either fact or it isn't. Darwin's Theory of Evolution isn't fact, what is so troubling about that?

VisigothSaxon

Animals have changed over millions of years by natural selection and punctuated equilibrium. This is a fact. Evolution is the explanation of that fact. Understand?

Just because there is a lot of research and people behind it does not make it fact. I am sorry, but if we are playing that game, religion wins because of the Bible. How much older is the Bible, how many people took part in it compared to the number of people alive at the time, imagine the effort and thought that was put into it. As far as I am concerned Darwin's Theory is no closer to fact than the Bible and God, why, because they cannot be proven nor disproven.

I still don't get why people fight this there is no such thing as close to fact, it is either fact or it isn't. Darwin's Theory of Evolution isn't fact, what is so troubling about that?

VisigothSaxon

[QUOTE="VisigothSaxon"]

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]

Gravity is a theory, the cell theory is a theory, so is the notion that matter is comprised of atoms.

It's quite easy to identify scientific illiterates like yourself who cannot even grasp the idea of a scientific theory. It's not used in the everyday definition similar to a guess or hint. A Theory in science is the highest form of truth you can attain.

HoolaHoopMan

That makes it no better than the Theory of God brought forth by organized religion. Stop your bias assumptions, face the facts, a theory is theory. Like it or not, Evolution does not hold more truth than Religion, they are on the level playing ground of cannot be proven nor disproven.

Sure there is, he could and he couldn't exist. IE it is still a theory, just like evolution, it cannot be proven no disproven, accept it.

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="Wii4Fun"]

Relax...all he is saying is that it is a theory and not a fact...:|

VisigothSaxon

The Bible is comprised of Historical Facts... See what I mean...

:| This thread is going to give me a stroke.. No it isn't.. We have no evidence Jesus walked on water, turned water into wine.. We have no evidence that a guy could live in a whale's stomach, or other such things.. They are not even the same.. Hence why Christianity and other religions require faith, because there is absolutly no real evidence to back up the mythological claims these books do..

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="VisigothSaxon"]

That makes it no better than the Theory of God brought forth by organized religion. Stop your bias assumptions, face the facts, a theory is theory. Like it or not, Evolution does not hold more truth than Religion, they are on the level playing ground of cannot be proven nor disproven.

VisigothSaxon

Sure there is, he could and he couldn't exist. IE it is still a theory, just like evolution, it cannot be proven no disproven, accept it.

:| It seems like you have no understanding what "falsifiable" means..

[QUOTE="VisigothSaxon"]

Just because there is a lot of research and people behind it does not make it fact. I am sorry, but if we are playing that game, religion wins because of the Bible. How much older is the Bible, how many people took part in it compared to the number of people alive at the time, imagine the effort and thought that was put into it. As far as I am concerned Darwin's Theory is no closer to fact than the Bible and God, why, because they cannot be proven nor disproven.

I still don't get why people fight this there is no such thing as close to fact, it is either fact or it isn't. Darwin's Theory of Evolution isn't fact, what is so troubling about that?

Genetic_Code

That is all inconsequential, both still cannot be proven/disproven regardless of what tools we have right now. The Bible as old as it is has yet to be proven/disproven the same goes for Darwin's Evolution.

Sure there is, he could and he couldn't exist. IE it is still a theory, just like evolution, it cannot be proven no disproven, accept it.

VisigothSaxon

Do you understand the concept of falsifiability? Or better yet are you even aware of the scientific method? God simply doesn't allow for scientific inquiry.

[QUOTE="FMAB_GTO"]well it IS a theory , the man was just writing what he thought , people have read it and believed it , others didnt , thats it !sSubZerOo

Jesus people THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "Theory" and "Scientific theory".. Evolution.. Scientific theory is the highest title the science community gives to it.. Within the community evolution is seen as a fact.. It did happen, there is entirely too much evidence and no counter evidence to go against it.. What is being argued is how and why it happened.

[QUOTE="redstorm72"]

[QUOTE="VisigothSaxon"]

The Bible is comprised of Historical Facts... See what I mean...

VisigothSaxon

Like Noah's ark and the Garden of Eden right?

More like Jesus for example, a known and proven Historical Person. The crucifixion as well. I mean you can go on and on, people agree the Bible contains many historical facts, the big question is if those were done in a Divine manner or some way we don't understand. Just like people agree Jesus existed, they cannot prove if he was the Son of God. There is a boat frozen in the Alps that people think may be Noah's ark because of the time period it is from.

So because a few parts have some degree of accuracy, everything in the bible is true? I guess Jurassic Park was true too because they mention Costa Rica in the book, and that place exists.

And the "Noah's ark" they found in the alps is just another case of a religious group jumping to conclusions like they did when they found "Noah's ark" in Turkey and every other time they've found "Noah's ark".

[QUOTE="VisigothSaxon"]

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"] Scientific theories are comprised of facts. He's more than obliged to rage when statements like yours are made. sSubZerOo

The Bible is comprised of Historical Facts... See what I mean...

:| This thread is going to give me a stroke.. No it isn't.. We have no evidence Jesus walked on water, turned water into wine.. We have no evidence that a guy could live in a whale's stomach, or other such things.. They are not even the same.. Hence why Christianity and other religions require faith, because there is absolutly no real evidence to back up the mythological claims these books do..

That is all inconsequential, both still cannot be proven/disproven regardless of what tools we have right now. The Bible as old as it is has yet to be proven/disproven the same goes for Darwin's Evolution.

VisigothSaxon

Actually Darwin's idea that animals change over time due to natural selection has been proven repeatedly, and many things in the bible have in fact been disproven (like the earth being about 6000 years old)

[QUOTE="VisigothSaxon"]

Sure there is, he could and he couldn't exist. IE it is still a theory, just like evolution, it cannot be proven no disproven, accept it.

HoolaHoopMan

Do you understand the concept of falsifiability? Or better yet are you even aware of the scientific method? God simply doesn't allow for scientific inquiry.

God could be proven/disproven just like Evolution.

For those of you who think ancient people and the scholars who wrote the bible were not intelligent and knowing in their own right,Read This

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="FMAB_GTO"]well it IS a theory , the man was just writing what he thought , people have read it and believed it , others didnt , thats it !FMAB_GTO

Jesus people THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "Theory" and "Scientific theory".. Evolution.. Scientific theory is the highest title the science community gives to it.. Within the community evolution is seen as a fact.. It did happen, there is entirely too much evidence and no counter evidence to go against it.. What is being argued is how and why it happened.

Which makes me lose faith with the public education system.. Its kind of the first things they teach you when you start taking basic science in middle school and high school.

[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="VisigothSaxon"]

Just because there is a lot of research and people behind it does not make it fact. I am sorry, but if we are playing that game, religion wins because of the Bible. How much older is the Bible, how many people took part in it compared to the number of people alive at the time, imagine the effort and thought that was put into it. As far as I am concerned Darwin's Theory is no closer to fact than the Bible and God, why, because they cannot be proven nor disproven.

I still don't get why people fight this there is no such thing as close to fact, it is either fact or it isn't. Darwin's Theory of Evolution isn't fact, what is so troubling about that?

VisigothSaxon

That is all inconsequential, both still cannot be proven/disproven regardless of what tools we have right now. The Bible as old as it is has yet to be proven/disproven the same goes for Darwin's Evolution.

[QUOTE="gubrushadow"]Yes , yes , yes , YES! It's a "theory" (so as everything else) but finally someone accepts that it could be disproven in future , or maybe not , who knows ?VisigothSaxon

Exactly who knows what will be proven/disproven in the future. I don't get what these people are afraid of, I guess you guys doubt the Theory of Evolution then, if you get so defensive over it. I don't get defensive over the fact that Religion and God is not proven, I accept that fact and it does not bother me by any means.

What does bother me is ignorance...