Creationism Vs. Evolution

[Mosasauria]

Evolution...

Really?

I never said I don't believe in evolution. I believe in it. It's just not fact.

And that is why we are debating. It is a fact. Look at all the posts over the last two pages. Then claim it not to be a fact.

[Caecili]

Both gravity and evolution are facts.

Where does it say gravity is fact? What about relativity? That's Einstein's theory.

Gravity is a proven natural phenomenon, so therefore is a fact. Relativity, however, is a theory

[GSSR]

evolution is considered a cultural and scientific belief

Then that consideration is false.

Evolution is not a belief, it is a theory.

This^

[Scotovy]

Where does it say gravity is fact? What about relativity? That's Einstein's theory.

Einstein didn't disprove gravity, he just explained better how it works.

I doubt you want to claim, that you could float in the air, if you just stop believing in gravity. Of course there will always be a gravity-like force, even if you refuse to call it gravity.

I'm not refusing to believe gravity. It exists. It's called the theory of gravity not the fact of gravity.

[Urwumpe]

I never said I don't believe in evolution. I believe in it. It's just not fact.

Simply prove the existence of one living being, that fulfills all the preconditions for evolution (limited resources, blablabla) and then show that it does not evolve. One is enough.

If the process of evolution is instead shown to apply to any observation in that context - it is a scientific fact.

[Neo Art]

Evolution...

Really?

I never said I don't believe in evolution. I believe in it. It's just not fact.

....do you often believe in things you think are fictional? It's a bit odd isn't it? Kinda like saying "I believe in dragons and unicorns and other fictional things". I don't think it's logically possible to believe in something that you don't believe is a fact.

[Scotovy]

I never said I don't believe in evolution. I believe in it. It's just not fact.

Simply prove the existence of one living being, that fulfills all the preconditions for evolution (limited resources, blablabla) and then show that it does not evolve. One is enough.

If the process of evolution is instead shown to apply to any observation in that context - it is a scientific fact.

Scientific is the key word.

[Mosasauria]

Simply prove the existence of one living being, that fulfills all the preconditions for evolution (limited resources, blablabla) and then show that it does not evolve. One is enough.

If the process of evolution is instead shown to apply to any observation in that context - it is a scientific fact.

Scientific is the key word.

One that you seem to keep ignoring.

[Caecili]

Simply prove the existence of one living being, that fulfills all the preconditions for evolution (limited resources, blablabla) and then show that it does not evolve. One is enough.

If the process of evolution is instead shown to apply to any observation in that context - it is a scientific fact.

Scientific is the key word.

Do you think that there's a difference between facts and scientific facts? They're the exact. same. thing.

[Scotovy]

Really?

I never said I don't believe in evolution. I believe in it. It's just not fact.

....do you often believe in things you think are fictional? It's a bit odd isn't it? Kinda like saying "I believe in dragons and unicorns and other fictional things". I don't think it's logically possible to believe in something that you don't believe is a fact.

Ummm.....no. Theories are not fictional.

[Urwumpe]

I'm not refusing to believe gravity. It exists. It's called the theory of gravity not the fact of gravity.

Yes. But now you are getting silly. The theory of gravity just explains where the force acting on you is coming from, and how strong it is ( and it does it very accurately), but it doesn't change the observation.

The force acting on you is a fact. And this force is called gravity.

The theory is not a fact, but until discovery of better evidence, the best explanation for the observed force called gravity, that we have. Maybe we will find out one day that the Heim-Quantum-Theory was right in the end.

[Neo Art]

....do you often believe in things you think are fictional? It's a bit odd isn't it? Kinda like saying "I believe in dragons and unicorns and other fictional things". I don't think it's logically possible to believe in something that you don't believe is a fact.

Ummm.....no. Theories are not fictional.

...things are either "fact" or they are not. If you believe that evolution occurs, then you believe that evolution occurs as a matter of fact. Again, I think it's logically impossible to believe that something is, without simultaniously believing in the fact that some thing is.

That's pretty definitional.

[Mosasauria]

I'm not refusing to believe gravity. It exists. It's called the theory of gravity not the fact of gravity.

Yes. But now you are getting silly. The theory of gravity just explains where the force acting on you is coming from, and how strong it is ( and it does it very accurately), but it doesn't change the observation.

The force acting on you is a fact. And this force is called gravity.

The theory is not a fact, but until discovery of better evidence, the best explanation for the observed force called gravity, that we have. Maybe we will find out one day that the Heim-Quantum-Theory was right in the end.

That's the only time we will find out anything and everything that isn't observable.

[Scotovy]

Scientific is the key word.

One that you seem to keep ignoring.

How exactly?

[Urwumpe]

Scientific is the key word.

Of course it is. But if you want to start teaching religion in a science subject at school, you should better be exact on the differences. Darwin should not tell you that you should not marry your cousin in front of God, and your priest should not tell an astrodynamics expert that angels are keeping his satellite in place. Such claims make people feel a bit uneasy, when it had been before just as easy as keeping radius and velocity vector under control.

[Scotovy]

Ummm.....no. Theories are not fictional.

...things are either "fact" or they are not. If you believe that evolution occurs, then you believe that evolution occurs as a matter of fact. Again, I think it's logically impossible to believe that something is, without simultaniously believing in the fact that some thing is.

That's pretty definitional.

True, but I believe in God too. It's called faith not fact. Doesn't mean He doesn't exist. We will all find out someday if He does or not.

I'm fighting a one man war.

[Neo Art]

...things are either "fact" or they are not. If you believe that evolution occurs, then you believe that evolution occurs as a matter of fact. Again, I think it's logically impossible to believe that something is, without simultaniously believing in the fact that some thing is.

That's pretty definitional.

True, but I believe in God too.

So you believe that god exists as a matter of fact then....

I am really not sure why this is so hard.

[Mosasauria]

...things are either "fact" or they are not. If you believe that evolution occurs, then you believe that evolution occurs as a matter of fact. Again, I think it's logically impossible to believe that something is, without simultaniously believing in the fact that some thing is.

That's pretty definitional.

True, but I believe in God too. It's called faith not fact. Doesn't mean He doesn't exist. We will all find out someday if He does or not.

I'm fighting a one man war.

No, you're bringing up crappy points in a debate, and ignoring what others have to say. Try again.

[Scotovy]

Fair enough, but don't laugh at me. That's rude.

What about proving evolution existed 1 million years ago. We only have the fossil record for that which is sketchy.

hundreds of thousands of fossils, (billions if you include invertebrates) is sketchy?
we also have biochemistry, developmental biology, and genetics to confirm past evolution.

Natural selection is a basic principle that must occur if the basic qualifiers(reproduction with heredity, limited resources, and heritable variation) are met.

Yes it is. Your weren't alive then so you don't know for sure how species are related. You guess based on similar fossil evidence?

[Scotovy]

True, but I believe in God too. It's called faith not fact. Doesn't mean He doesn't exist. We will all find out someday if He does or not.

I'm fighting a one man war.

No, you're bringing up crappy points in a debate, and ignoring what others have to say. Try again.

I'm not ignoring others thoughts. You all have very good points. Does that mean your ignoring my thoughts on creationism?

[Mosasauria]

hundreds of thousands of fossils, (billions if you include invertebrates) is sketchy?
we also have biochemistry, developmental biology, and genetics to confirm past evolution.

Natural selection is a basic principle that must occur if the basic qualifiers(reproduction with heredity, limited resources, and heritable variation) are met.

Yes it is. Your weren't alive then so you don't know for sure how species are related. You guess based on similar fossil evidence?

Wrong again.
We can tell throught these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenetics
The first helps in the exact relation of organisms and is critical for proper classification.
The second is useful in combination with the first for determining possible relationships or convergent evolution.

[Ceannairceach]

No, you're bringing up crappy points in a debate, and ignoring what others have to say. Try again.

I'm not ignoring others thoughts. You all have very good points. Does that mean your ignoring my thoughts on creationism?

Until you bring up evidence, yes, I am.

[Caecili]

No, you're bringing up crappy points in a debate, and ignoring what others have to say. Try again.

I'm not ignoring others thoughts. You all have very good points. Does that mean your ignoring my thoughts on creationism?

What are your thoughts on creationism? I don't think you've mentioned them.

[Scotovy]

True, but I believe in God too.

So you believe that god exists as a matter of fact then....

I am really not sure why this is so hard.

No, I said before it's faith not fact. Not sure why people don't get that.

[Neo Art]

No, you're bringing up crappy points in a debate, and ignoring what others have to say. Try again.

I'm not ignoring others thoughts. You all have very good points. Does that mean your ignoring my thoughts on creationism?

Actually I think people here did a pretty good job of directly combating them and demonstrating that your "thoughts on creationism" are wild speculation, utterly unprovable, or thoroughly refuted.