re: Science is debunking itself again

quote:

---

I don't know what to tell you.

---

Au contraire.
You've told more than you realize.

You're telling me you are the one not reading others' posts ... or you're clueless as to their content.

quote:

---

If you mean evolution to be so broad as to mean change.. of course.

---

Of course it's of course.

The problem is when people get emotional about scientific theories.

quote:

---

to say we evolved from another species

---

First you would have to define specifically what a "species" is. It starts getting a little cloudy when you start decoding genomes. That's why both Watson and Crick's work, as well as decoding the human genome at the end of the 20th century have so far supported Darwin's theory of natural selection to explain evolution.

That is not to say something won't come along later to disprove it.

Human beings demand certainties, science deals in probabilities.

quote:

---

You're telling me you are the one not reading others' posts

---

I've read the responses to my original post ITT, but I haven't read the whole thread - this time.

But it really doesn't matter because people continue to make the same error over and over again that they always make in these threads: mistaking evolution as the theory instead of recognizing natural selection as being the theory to explain the phenomenon of evolution.

The problem is that people think Darwin's theory conflicts with their religious beliefs even though Darwin himself was a devout Christian and didn't see at all how his theory of natural selection conflicted with his religion. Galileo also didn't see how his theory of heliocentrism conflicted with his religion - but the Pope sure got emotional and irrational over the issue.

Once someone perceives that their religious beliefs are challenged, they very often get emotional and lose rational thought.

BTW...

quote:

---

When something in science is fact...it is referred to as Scientific Law.

---

Not necessarily, sometimes it is referred to as an, "observable phenomenon".

And yes, I understand the difference between hypothesis, theory and law.


But there is still uncertainty at the bottom of all scientific laws.

The scientist are referenced in the video I posted.

quote:

---

I've read the responses to my original post ITT, but I haven't read the whole thread - this time.

But it really doesn't matter because people continue to make the same error over and over again that they always make in these threads: mistaking evolution as the theory instead of recognizing natural selection as being the theory to explain the phenomenon of evolution.

The problem is that people think Darwin's theory conflicts with their religious beliefs even though Darwin himself was a devout Christian and didn't see at all how his theory of natural selection conflicted with his religion. Galileo also didn't see how his theory of heliocentrism conflicted with his religion - but the Pope sure got emotional and irrational over the issue.

Once someone perceives that their religious beliefs are challenged, they very often get emotional and lose rational thought.

---

Using similar logic, Larry David presumed Elon Musk to support child murder.

quote:

---

But there is still uncertainty at the bottom of all scientific laws.

---

Excuse me?

quote:

---

Excuse me?

---

Call 1-800-Heisenburg.

quote:

---

You think evolution will be “debunked”?

---

There’s no good evidence of true evolution, where one kind becomes something totally different than the original life form. There are many examples of species adaptations.

Give me irrefutable evidence of a life form that’s evolved from a primitive state, say like a single cell or even a sea creature that’s evolved to a more complex form of life where the steps of evolution are documented incrementally in some type of fossil records. You’re not gonna find it.