Evolution or Creationism

[Deathly]

Would not law be the highest, example Law of Gravity. Scientific proven through mathematics, yet still science.

Nope. Go check out the difference between laws and theories and the historical reasons for the names. It is fascinating

A scientific law or scientific principle is a concise verbal or mathematical statement of a relation that expresses a fundamental principle of science, like Newton's law of universal gravitation.
Thats what Wiki says. yes i know Wiki is not credible.
I apologize the lack of a question mark after the question in the previous statement.

[Bottle]

Evolutionary Theory has been proven.

If it is proven then why is it still called a Theory?

LISTEN UP PLEASE

I am about to answer this question for you. I am going to answer it clearly and using very simple words.

I will do this even though you are approximately the 50 bazillionth person to ask this same inane question, and the 10 bazillionth to ask it in this thread alone.

As repayment for my generosity, I ask one thing and one thing only:

Never. Ask. This. Question. Again.

Now then.

"The Theory Of Evolution" may sound like a nice long name, but it's actually a nick-name. The FULL name of the theory is "The Theory Of Evolution Via Natural Selection."

Evolution occurs. This is a fact. It is not a theory that evolution takes place; we know it does. We see it. We study it. It occurs. I have personally observed evolution, first hand, in a college biology class.

The theory is about HOW evolution occurs. The theory is that evolution occurs via natural selection.

Call the Theory by its full name, and you won't be confused ever again!

Ever. Again.

[Sociobiology]

Would not law be the highest, example Law of Gravity. Scientific proven through mathematics, yet still science.

Nope. Go check out the difference between laws and theories and the historical reasons for the names. It is fascinating

a law is just a repeated observation, a theory explains those observations and makes predictions about future observations.
law of cake: people in general like to eat cake
theory of cake: people like to eat cake due to various contents of the cake (sugar, starch, ect.) stimulating the taste receptors originally evolved to identify highly nutritious food in animal ancestors. This is reinforced by social priming associating cake with rewards or celebration.

see why the theory is more valuable, and more powerful.
for one the theory predicts other food that humans would like to eat.

[Deathly]

If it is proven then why is it still called a Theory?

LISTEN UP PLEASE

I am about to answer this question for you. I am going to answer it clearly and using very simple words.

I will do this even though you are approximately the 50 bazillionth person to ask this same inane question, and the 10 bazillionth to ask it in this thread alone.

As repayment for my generosity, I ask one thing and one thing only:

Never. Ask. This. Question. Again.

Now then.

"The Theory Of Evolution" may sound like a nice long name, but it's actually a nick-name. The FULL name of the theory is "The Theory Of Evolution Via Natural Selection."

Evolution occurs. This is a fact. It is not a theory that evolution takes place; we know it does. We see it. We study it. It occurs. I have personally observed evolution, first hand, in a college biology class.

The theory is about HOW evolution occurs. The theory is that evolution occurs via natural selection.

Call the Theory by its full name, and you won't be confused ever again!

Ever. Again.

I was only pointing out that it is not Law, there are still things that may not be true inside evolution via Natural selection. I am not arguing against evolution. I think to some degree it is true, however not totally true.

[Intangelon]

Put your hands together.

It's said that God created the earth in six days. Well, what's a day to an omnipotence/omnipresence? Why, it could be millions or billions of years, by golly. Who's to say evolution isn't part of the creative process?

[Farnhamia]

LISTEN UP PLEASE

I am about to answer this question for you. I am going to answer it clearly and using very simple words.

I will do this even though you are approximately the 50 bazillionth person to ask this same inane question, and the 10 bazillionth to ask it in this thread alone.

As repayment for my generosity, I ask one thing and one thing only:

Never. Ask. This. Question. Again.

Now then.

"The Theory Of Evolution" may sound like a nice long name, but it's actually a nick-name. The FULL name of the theory is "The Theory Of Evolution Via Natural Selection."

Evolution occurs. This is a fact. It is not a theory that evolution takes place; we know it does. We see it. We study it. It occurs. I have personally observed evolution, first hand, in a college biology class.

The theory is about HOW evolution occurs. The theory is that evolution occurs via natural selection.

Call the Theory by its full name, and you won't be confused ever again!

Ever. Again.

I was only pointing out that it is not Law, there are still things that may not be true inside evolution via Natural selection. I am not arguing against evolution. I think to some degree it is true, however not totally true.

Like, what's not true? I would love to learn.

[Ceannairceach]

Put your hands together.

It's said that God created the earth in six days. Well, what's a day to an omnipotence/omnipresence? Why, it could be millions or billions of years, by golly. Who's to say evolution isn't part of the creative process?

Apparently, a day to God is a thousand years(so sayeth the bible). So its still wrong.

[Sociobiology]

LISTEN UP PLEASE

I am about to answer this question for you. I am going to answer it clearly and using very simple words.

I will do this even though you are approximately the 50 bazillionth person to ask this same inane question, and the 10 bazillionth to ask it in this thread alone.

As repayment for my generosity, I ask one thing and one thing only:

Never. Ask. This. Question. Again.

Now then.

"The Theory Of Evolution" may sound like a nice long name, but it's actually a nick-name. The FULL name of the theory is "The Theory Of Evolution Via Natural Selection."

Evolution occurs. This is a fact. It is not a theory that evolution takes place; we know it does. We see it. We study it. It occurs. I have personally observed evolution, first hand, in a college biology class.

The theory is about HOW evolution occurs. The theory is that evolution occurs via natural selection.

Call the Theory by its full name, and you won't be confused ever again!

Ever. Again.

I was only pointing out that it is not Law, there are still things that may not be true inside evolution via Natural selection. I am not arguing against evolution. I think to some degree it is true, however not totally true.

Ok no, theories cannot ever become laws, laws are different structures, than theories, laws are only recordive in nature and predict themselves. while theories are explanatory and predict other testable scenarios.
theories predict laws, laws cannot predict theories.
the law of evolution is: the morphology and genetic profile of populations of organisms change over time, the Theory of natural selection is the only theory explaining this with any evidence, in fact it has such overwhelming evidence that other theories and laws are built on top of it.

[The Black Forrest]

I was only pointing out that it is not Law, there are still things that may not be true inside evolution via Natural selection. I am not arguing against evolution. I think to some degree it is true, however not totally true.

Ok no, theories cannot ever become laws, laws are different structures, than theories, laws are only recordive in nature and predict themselves. while theories are explanatory and predict other testable scenarios.
theories predict laws, laws cannot predict theories.
the law of evolution is: the morphology and genetic profile of populations of organisms change over time, the Theory of natural selection is the only theory explaining this with any evidence, in fact it has such overwhelming evidence that other theories and laws are built on top of it.

When was the last thing declared to be a law?.......

[Deathly]

Put your hands together.

It's said that God created the earth in six days. Well, what's a day to an omnipotence/omnipresence? Why, it could be millions or billions of years, by golly. Who's to say evolution isn't part of the creative process?

Apparently, a day to God is a thousand years(so sayeth the bible). So its still wrong.

Where?

[Arkinesia]

Put your hands together.

It's said that God created the earth in six days. Well, what's a day to an omnipotence/omnipresence? Why, it could be millions or billions of years, by golly. Who's to say evolution isn't part of the creative process?

Then you could also argue that:

• Jesus took three thousand years to rise
• The Israelites marched around Jericho once every one thousand years
• Jesus fasted for forty thousand years

And so on.

[Genivar]

Apparently, a day to God is a thousand years(so sayeth the bible). So its still wrong.

Where?

Psalm 90:4
For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.

[Deathly]

I was only pointing out that it is not Law, there are still things that may not be true inside evolution via Natural selection. I am not arguing against evolution. I think to some degree it is true, however not totally true.

Like, what's not true? I would love to learn.

The two reasons I see is one: Should not all of the stages of evolution still be present? Two: How could the beginning "protein strand" evolved if it would have died for lack of food, shelter, and things needed to keep it alive?

[Deathly]

Where?

Psalm 90:4
For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.

That is a Hyperbole, David is saying that God is so great time, basically, means nothing to Him.

[The Black Forrest]

Where?

Psalm 90:4
For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.

When the earth was the center of the universe?

[Genivar]

Psalm 90:4
For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.

When the earth was the center of the universe?

And flat to.

[Tipidemica]

Well, would you rather follow the trend and be stupid, or be smart and exiled?

And why would you trust a humanly made book rather then a non-human, non-physical super power that is proven by humans?

PS:
How could god make Earth in 6 Earthly day if there is no earth to count said days?

[Deathly]

Put your hands together.

It's said that God created the earth in six days. Well, what's a day to an omnipotence/omnipresence? Why, it could be millions or billions of years, by golly. Who's to say evolution isn't part of the creative process?

Then you could also argue that:

• Jesus took three thousand years to rise
• The Israelites marched around Jericho once every one thousand years
• Jesus fasted for forty thousand years

And so on.

Did you know, there are two creation accounts? I think the point of the first is to say God created it, not necessarily literally six days, He could have, but it is unlikely he would do that.

[Genivar]

Then you could also argue that:

• Jesus took three thousand years to rise
• The Israelites marched around Jericho once every one thousand years
• Jesus fasted for forty thousand years

And so on.

Did you know, there are two creation accounts? I think the point of the first is to say God created it, not necessarily literally six days, He could have, but it is unlikely he would do that.

Where are you getting this?

[The Alma Mater]

Did you know, there are two creation accounts? I think the point of the first is to say God created it, not necessarily literally six days, He could have, but it is unlikely he would do that.

Where are you getting this?

The two seperate creation accounts are in Genesis. A Book that noone hardly ever reads, yet insists should be taught as the literal truth in schools.

[Deathly]

When the earth was the center of the universe?

And flat to.

First you should find out how some Christians believe the Bible is written, that would explain the authors believing the earth at the center or flat.

[Leepaidamba]

When the earth was the center of the universe?

And flat to.

with ships falling below the horizon and returning,

[Tipidemica]

And flat to.

with ships falling below the horizon and returning,

I shat my pants when I saw one of those ships do that. So, I fixed it.
-God

[Deathly]

Did you know, there are two creation accounts? I think the point of the first is to say God created it, not necessarily literally six days, He could have, but it is unlikely he would do that.

Where are you getting this?

Christians should know the Bible is not perfect or, in my view, the First creation narrative is more of saying how powerful God is, that he could make the world in six days. So the six day Creationism is wrong. I believe, as previously stated, that God gave the opportunity for life to evolve.

[Intangelon]

Put your hands together.

It's said that God created the earth in six days. Well, what's a day to an omnipotence/omnipresence? Why, it could be millions or billions of years, by golly. Who's to say evolution isn't part of the creative process?

Apparently, a day to God is a thousand years(so sayeth the bible). So its still wrong.

Where in the Bible, please?