Study help- What is the purpose of the evolution theory?
Options
Comments
-
lol at your avi.
so jesus is "coming soon" for the past 2000 years yet you think science needs "excuses" to deny the existence of ? ?
science doesn't really give a ? about ? or whatever you believe in.
so you're telling me that scientists went back in time and planted fossil evidence to back up their claims as part of some conspiracy to discredit religion?
1.
"3First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5But they deliberately forget that long ago by ? ’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.
8But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:3-9
2. Science said the earth was flat. ? said the earth was round. "Let ? be true, and every man a liar." Romans 3:4
3. The fossil record is proof of a global world wide flood. -
perspective@100 wrote: »Simply put, anything science related that deals with creation is to debunk religion. They have created a system of fasle knowledge that only allows the "thinker" to use a limited set of variables and rules. Science is the new "religion". We must accept science even though it doesn't have full explanations hence the term theory or scientific theory. It does not matter what they can prove it only matters that "you" can't disprove it.
Welocme to modern society.
I think you meant to say... "We must accept religion even though it doesn't have full explanations hence the term blind faith or mental illness."DoUwant2go2Heaven? wrote: »1.
"3First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5But they deliberately forget that long ago by ? ’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.
8But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:3-9
2. Science said the earth was flat. ? said the earth was round. "Let ? be true, and every man a liar." Romans 3:4
3. The fossil record is proof of a global world wide flood.
yo - even for a religious person i can tell you're not that smart so i'm not going to argue with you but here's a helpful hint - when you're arguing with an atheist about science it doesn't really make much sense to back up your claims with bible quotes.
T/S - if you live in Texas, Kentucky or Alabama then by all means write your paper based on this primative's advice. You'll get an A. -
Uhh, the answer to what causes evolution has been known for a long ass time breh. The only people that doesn't understand the evolution and natural selection are either A) religious people who want to say ? did it,
the ignorant who haven't done any research, or C) the disingenuous who understand evolution, but like to use straw man analogies to somehow disprove it (IE if evolution is real, where's the chickenshark and BS like that).
lol fixed....... -
*************************************DoUwant2go2Heaven? wrote: »Question:
"What is the purpose of evolutionary theory?"
Answer:
To provide another excuse for man to deny the existence of ? . The devil is conditioning humanity to accept the anti-christ when he is revealed. Evolutionary theory and alien conspiracy are 2 of the tools the devil is using to prepare a godless world for the acceptance of a ? -like figure, the anti-christ.
Read Revelation 13 for wisdom, knowledge, instruction, and understanding. ? bless.
-
I think you meant to say... "We must accept religion even though it doesn't have full explanations hence the term blind faith or mental illness."
yo - even for a religious person i can tell you're not that smart so i'm not going to argue with you but here's a helpful hint - when you're arguing with an atheist about science it doesn't really make much sense to back up your claims with bible quotes.
T/S - if you live in Texas, Kentucky or Alabama then by all means write your paper based on this primative's advice. You'll get an A.
Thanks for the information. I'll be sure to file it in the round file. ? bless. -
Itz Luigi ? ! wrote: »Let's try environment...
I.E.
Animals that live in cold weather develope layers of fat & blubber, or really thick coates of hair...
Or sea creatures having gills and land animals having lungs...
That is evolution my friend...
Why do you think doctors tell you to not abuse antibiotics?
i disagree, thats more of adaption then evolution. evolution is like a species of fish where a group at one end of the lake become reptiles and the others become amphibians
animals who live in certain conditions have certain diets and eating habits. the world has more obese people in it today than ever, but that is not evolution, that is mcdonalds lol -
DoUwant2go2Heaven? wrote: »Question:
"What is the purpose of evolutionary theory?"
Answer:
To provide another excuse for man to deny the existence of ? . The devil is conditioning humanity to accept the anti-christ when he is revealed. Evolutionary theory and alien conspiracy are 2 of the tools the devil is using to prepare a godless world for the acceptance of a ? -like figure, the anti-christ.
Read Revelation 13 for wisdom, knowledge, instruction, and understanding. ? bless.
seems like every time you post you just leave yourself open for various forms of ether
even people who dont believe in ? can agree that the theory of evolution does not prove or disprove the existence of ? . technically, "? " could have "placed" everything together knowing that evolution would take place thereafter, thus creating man from the "dust of the earth". this is why no one respects religion ... because of people like you, and ironically, instead of saving souls youre running people away from your beliefs with your ridiculous, uneducated, and emotional bursts of ignorance
LOL -
deep but misguided hope tells them that someone will PM them a pre-written paperKTULU IS BACK wrote: »i do not understand why anyone would come to the IC for help with their homework when google exists -
UPTOWN (CONNEXX) wrote: »seems like every time you post you just leave yourself open for various forms of ether
even people who dont believe in ? can agree that the theory of evolution does not prove or disprove the existence of ? . technically, "? " could have "placed" everything together knowing that evolution would take place thereafter, thus creating man from the "dust of the earth". this is why no one respects religion ... because of people like you, and ironically, instead of saving souls youre running people away from your beliefs with your ridiculous, uneducated, and emotional bursts of ignorance
LOL
Huh??????? -
son, go read and understand the definition of scientific theory. Saying it's just a theory means you don't even have a basic fundamental understanding of the subject. Like I said, people who make these types of statements are either willfully ignorant, being disingenuous, or just don't know any better.
scientific theory
noun
a theory that explains scientific observations; "scientific theories must be falsifiable"
Encyclopedia
Scientific Theory
systematic ideational structure of broad scope, conceived by the human imagination, that encompasses a family of empirical (experiential) laws regarding regularities existing in objects and events, both observed and posited. A scientific theory is a structure suggested by these laws and is devised to explain them in a scientifically rational manner.
Theory
1.
a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2.
a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3.
Mathematics . a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4.
the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5.
a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
6.
contemplation or speculation.
7.
guess or conjecture.
http://dictionary.reference.com/
As I said, it's not absolute. So as I said, it's incomplete. Prove them wrong, I'm more than willing to learn. -
This actually shows that biological evolution is not a theory, since biological evolution is an observed phenomena.scientific theory
noun
a theory that explains scientific observations; "scientific theories must be falsifiable"
Encyclopedia
Scientific Theory
systematic ideational structure of broad scope, conceived by the human imagination, that encompasses a family of empirical (experiential) laws regarding regularities existing in objects and events, both observed and posited. A scientific theory is a structure suggested by these laws and is devised to explain them in a scientifically rational manner.
Theory
1.
a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2.
a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3.
Mathematics . a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4.
the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5.
a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
6.
contemplation or speculation.
7.
guess or conjecture.
http://dictionary.reference.com/
As I said, it's not absolute. So as I said, it's incomplete. Prove them wrong, I'm more than willing to learn.
To quote myself:fiat_money wrote: »No. Evolution is not a theory, but an observed component of biology.
What's theoretical are the methods in which some organisms evolved and the precursors to their evolution.
To simplify: There are theories of evolution, but evolution is not a theory. Kind of like how it was said earlier that there are theories of gravity, but gravity is not a theory. -
Appologies to T/Sso you're telling me that scientists went back in time and planted fossil evidence to back up their claims as part of some conspiracy to discredit religion?
I'm not trying to go off topic in this thread but since he asked me a specific question I must answer.
No. Science has worked its way into society and become a super power. Scientific research controls everything. Hundreds of years ago Religion dominated. As long as science can dig deeper in the Earth and find things that will debunk religion it will continue to do so. Creating a society that is less religious and more scientific.
Science gives you a little more information than religion and you are now satisfied with that knowledge. In the future people will think you are mentally ill for what you believe today. The science of today will be obsolete and you will be seen as primitiveI think you meant to say... "We must accept religion even though it doesn't have full explanations hence the term blind faith or mental illness." -
fiat_money wrote: »This actually shows that biological evolution is not a theory, since biological evolution is an observed phenomena.
To quote myself:
To simplify: There are theories of evolution, but evolution is not a theory. Kind of like how it was said earlier that there are theories of gravity, but gravity is not a theory.
unless someone has lived for billions of years they cant OBSERVE evolution in the absolute sense. and unless u dug up and tested fossils yourself you can only trust what somebody else told u. -
perspective@100 wrote: »Appologies to T/S
I'm not trying to go off topic in this thread but since he asked me a specific question I must answer.
No. Science has worked its way into society and become a super power. Scientific research controls everything. Hundreds of years ago Religion dominated. As long as science can dig deeper in the Earth and find things that will debunk religion it will continue to do so. Creating a society that is less religious and more scientific.
Science gives you a little more information than religion and you are now satisfied with that knowledge. In the future people will think you are mentally ill for what you believe today. The science of today will be obsolete and you will be seen as primitive
the past 500 years have been dominated by modern science and look at all the "L's humanity has taken in that span of time. modern science is stupid. these mofos can make a cell phone that can do your taxes and translate hindi to russian but they cant fix the damage theyve done to the water. im with u on your stance. -
Scholar Jaw wrote: »Im not looking for a copy and pasted essay, I just want a general idea
For example, Is it to give an alternative account for the creation of the universe? Help guys!!
Which kind of evolution do you refer to ? Evolution guided by intelligence ? [like technology evolves]
Or blind "creatorless" evolution ? [which is as absurd as thinking you could write a meaningful letter just by randomly pressing keys] -
perspective@100 wrote: »Appologies to T/S
I'm not trying to go off topic in this thread but since he asked me a specific question I must answer.
No. Science has worked its way into society and become a super power. Scientific research controls everything. Hundreds of years ago Religion dominated. As long as science can dig deeper in the Earth and find things that will debunk religion it will continue to do so. Creating a society that is less religious and more scientific.
Science gives you a little more information than religion and you are now satisfied with that knowledge. In the future people will think you are mentally ill for what you believe today. The science of today will be obsolete and you will be seen as primitive
Well I don't exactly think things were better hundreds of years ago when religion dominated so I'm not sure where you're going with that. As far as scientific research controlling everything I can't believe we even have to have this argument. What's wrong with trying to figure out how the universe works? While I agree that the way scientific research is used and applied is often misguided or foolish it doesn't mean the knowledge itself is bad.
It is possible to be religious and and not anti-science. I'm not even sure why some religious people want to make it an either/or situation since science can't lose that one. What do you call the force that kept Jesus stuck to planet earth as it revolved around the sun and the moon controlled the tides? See what I'm getting at here? even in a religious context science still ? to explain how things work.
And your analogy between science becoming debunked like religion is preposterous. Science changes. If we find out that the theory of relativity doesn't hold up then a new scientific theory will take it's place. Science can correct itself and facts aren't subject to interpretation.
I'm sure right now you're reading all this from a computer that runs on prayer alone. -
Scholar Jaw wrote: »To both K_Smart and flat money,
Does it account for the creation of humans then?the past 500 years have been dominated by modern science and look at all the "L's humanity has taken in that span of time. modern science is stupid. these mofos can make a cell phone that can do your taxes and translate hindi to russian but they cant fix the damage theyve done to the water. im with u on your stance.
Lol @ science being the reason for humanity taking L's.
We take L's for the simple fact of being human. We make mistakes. We dealing with the same ? we been dealin with since before 500 years ago. -
What class is this for?
-
Can someone tell me what is the strongest support for natural selection as informed by Darwin?
-
1. Geographic distribution of animals.
If you go to south america you will find sloths. You will find fossils of sloths in the same area. You do not find sloths in other locations. (Well to be fair there are extinct sloths other than the Americas) If you look for marsupials you will find them almost exclusive in one corner of the world. This is evidence that species are mutable and are effected by their local environment. it alos supports the conclusion that changes within species are passed via sexual reproduction.
2. Observed examples of natural selection.
Several experiments have tracked bacteria through thousands of generations. Natural selection (changes in genetic makeup of the population) have been observed in all cases.
3. DNA evidence
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/05/04/0914609107.full.pdf . In particular I have always found pseudo-genes and ERVs to but slam dunks regarding evolution in general. ERV are retro viruses that get inserted into a DNA of a cell. When this happens in a germ cell (sperm or egg cell) the ERV is repeated in every cell of the new organism. Since we can align DNA amongst animals we can compare the presence of an ERV in our genome against a chimp's or a mouse. What we find is we share more ERVs with chimps than any other animal. When I say share I mean we have the exact same retro-virus at the exact same spot on our DNA. Since we know how ERVs get added to our gene code we know the only answer is we shared common ancestry with animals that we share an ERV with. While this does not support natural selection specifically it makes common decent a slam-dunk. -
Scholar Jaw wrote: »Can someone tell me what is the strongest support for natural selection as informed by Darwin?
Try looking at the variations between species that only exist in Madagascar vs. those in Southeastern Africa. They obviously share common ancestry but after Madagascar broke off from the mainland they adapted. -
1. Geographic distribution of animals.
If you go to south america you will find sloths. You will find fossils of sloths in the same area. You do not find sloths in other locations. (Well to be fair there are extinct sloths other than the Americas) If you look for marsupials you will find them almost exclusive in one corner of the world. This is evidence that species are mutable and are effected by their local environment. it alos supports the conclusion that changes within species are passed via sexual reproduction.
2. Observed examples of natural selection.
Several experiments have tracked bacteria through thousands of generations. Natural selection (changes in genetic makeup of the population) have been observed in all cases.
3. DNA evidence
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/05/04/0914609107.full.pdf . In particular I have always found pseudo-genes and ERVs to but slam dunks regarding evolution in general. ERV are retro viruses that get inserted into a DNA of a cell. When this happens in a germ cell (sperm or egg cell) the ERV is repeated in every cell of the new organism. Since we can align DNA amongst animals we can compare the presence of an ERV in our genome against a chimp's or a mouse. What we find is we share more ERVs with chimps than any other animal. When I say share I mean we have the exact same retro-virus at the exact same spot on our DNA. Since we know how ERVs get added to our gene code we know the only answer is we shared common ancestry with animals that we share an ERV with. While this does not support natural selection specifically it makes common decent a slam-dunk.
Does Darwin really extend his theory to humans? Last question I promise
-
Evolution may be a slow process, but that does't mean no biological evolution has been observed by humans. A simple example is that all modern domesticated dogs are descendants of the gray wolf; because of various mutations and breeding, the species is now extremely diverse. On a much shorter timescale, the evolution of bacteria can be observed well within a human's lifespan.unless someone has lived for billions of years they cant OBSERVE evolution in the absolute sense. and unless u dug up and tested fossils yourself you can only trust what somebody else told u. -
perspective@100 wrote: »Appologies to T/S
I'm not trying to go off topic in this thread but since he asked me a specific question I must answer.
No. Science has worked its way into society and become a super power. Scientific research controls everything. Hundreds of years ago Religion dominated. As long as science can dig deeper in the Earth and find things that will debunk religion it will continue to do so. Creating a society that is less religious and more scientific.
Science gives you a little more information than religion and you are now satisfied with that knowledge. In the future people will think you are mentally ill for what you believe today. The science of today will be obsolete and you will be seen as primitive
............................................... -
Scholar Jaw wrote: »Does Darwin really extend his theory to humans? Last question I promise
Yes. Humans are the product of an evolutionary process. Darwin's book Descent of Man discussed this aspect of evolution.
