Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    All of science is theory, by definition. It cannot be proven, but very strong evidence can be brought in its favour. Evolution and creationism are both theories, but the difference is that there is a lot of evidence for evolution and hardly any for creationism.
    What do you mean 'All of science is theory'??? What about the law of gravity?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moncal)
    I would like somebody to prove mathematically that it is not statistically impossible for millions of species over millions of years to randomly evolve? Then you have to figure the odds of a cloud of dust condenseing into a planet. NO, make that a thousand planets and all the stars. Why isn't there life on every planet? If evolution was true, then organism would adapt to live on mercury, and venus, and mars, and the moon too.
    The chance of rain falling in the desert at a given day is less than a 100 to 1. This does not mean that if you wake up one day in your desert tent and see wet sand all the way to the horison that you will assume aliens flooded the planet.

    The rest of your post is self-contradictive. You claim both that evolution is very unlikely to occur, and at the same time you question why it has not occured everywhere. Since when did a very low probability imply that an event happens frequently? Last time I checked my maths book a low probability meant that an event happens very rarely. I can see why you want someone to work out the maths for you, cus obviously it is very confusing to you.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    All of science is theory, by definition. It cannot be proven, but very strong evidence can be brought in its favour. Evolution and creationism are both theories, but the difference is that there is a lot of evidence for evolution and hardly any for creationism.
    what evidence is there for creationism exactly? its a theory thats been proven to be wrong
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    I agree with that as I said in my first post (i think :confused: )all i was trying to point out is that creationism can't be completely ruled out.
    I see your point and all, but creationism really must be ruled out. It simply isn't true.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    I don't believe in creationism. I believe in evolution and am currently considering a form of catastrophism (that a previously reasonably advanced civilisation was wiped out by a natural disaster - and no, not Atlantis :rolleyes: ). There's quite a lot of evidence knocking about for this but its still very much unproven.
    Never thought of that one but it could work. Would this be before or after the dinosause
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sire)
    What do you mean 'All of science is theory'??? What about the law of gravity?
    Which one? Newton's Einstein's or someone else's?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sire)
    What do you mean 'All of science is theory'??? What about the law of gravity?
    In science a law is defined as a theory for which there is so strong evidence that it is unreasonable to daubt it. Furthermore, the concept is rarely used nowdays because , among other things, the "law" of gravity formulated by Newton turned out to be innaccurate in certain situations and is now replaced by Einsteins general relativity theory of gravitation. Regardless, eaven "laws" may, potentially, be falsified in science. This does in no way mean that a theory will neccessarily be falsified, just that it is possible (no matter how unlikely) that the present theory needs to be adjusted in order to be accurate within fewer prerequisits.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Speciez99)
    what evidence is there for creationism exactly? its a theory thats been proven to be wrong
    Creationism is a very vague theory. It is not a scientific theory for that reason. it can't be proved wrong because its followers change it to evade every inconvenient argument against it.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    I agree with that as I said in my first post (i think :confused: )all i was trying to point out is that creationism can't be completely ruled out.
    That something can never be completely ruled out does not mean that it is reasonable to considder it. There is a minor chance that you will survive if you fire a bullet through your head, but I would not bet on it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    I don't believe in creationism. I believe in evolution and am currently considering a form of catastrophism (that a previously reasonably advanced civilisation was wiped out by a natural disaster - and no, not Atlantis :rolleyes: ). There's quite a lot of evidence knocking about for this but its still very much unproven.
    Such as? I saw a documentary on a supposed Isle of Moo off the coast of China. It was said to be apparently 1000 years older than the oldest known human civilisation in books today. Is this a similar thing?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Long time after the dinosaurs! I mean human civilation(s), destroyed after the melting of the ice caps some time after 10000 BC.

    But there is also another theory which says that every 125 (or was it 250?) million years the solar system passes through a rocky region of the galaxy and the earth is hit by large asteroids, resulting in mass extinctions.
    :eek: That doesn't sound so good.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    The chance of rain falling in the desert at a given day is less than a 100 to 1. This does not mean that if you wake up one day in your desert tent and see wet sand all the way to the horison that you will assume aliens flooded the planet.

    The rest of your post is self-contradictive. You claim both that evolution is very unlikely to occur, and at the same time you question why it has not occured everywhere. Since when did a very low probability imply that an event happens frequently? Last time I checked my maths book a low probability meant that an event happens very rarely. I can see why you want someone to work out the maths for you, cus obviously it is very confusing to you.
    That's it exactly, I can't figure out how it could happen here and result in intelligent thinking beings and yet can't even produce a microscopic lifeform somewhere else? Could you please tell me how this could be? Please, clear it up for me.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    Which one? Newton's Einstein's or someone else's?
    Ok, yourself and Jonaton made that point. I wasn't talking about a person's law. I was talking about the fact that what goes up, must come down. That is a law, or perhaps a rule. But much the same thing. Yes the law can be broken. Neil Armstrong take a bow, but only by applying an overwhelming strength of other laws against it.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Weejimmie)
    Creationism is a very vague theory. It is not a scientific theory for that reason. it can't be proved wrong because its followers change it to evade every inconvenient argument against it.
    Actually, it is not a problem that you may adjust your hypothesis. Modern scientific theories are adjusted all the time. The reasons why creationism is not a scientific theory is basicly that you have no experimental backing for it whatsoever. At best, creationism can be regarded as an irrelevant hypothesis. In order to become a theory, it must be proven to make correct predictions about the outcome of an experiment or investigation which cannot be explained by existing theories. Thus it is not enough to find experimental evidence that is consistent with creationism. It must also be unexplainable by simpler already existing theories.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moncal)
    That's it exactly, I can't figure out how it could happen here and result in intelligent thinking beings and yet can't even produce a microscopic lifeform somewhere else? Could you please tell me how this could be? Please, clear it up for me.
    There may be microscopic life on other planets there may be whole civilisations in the universe. It's just that we haven't found evidence of them yet. I think they may have found a fossilied micro-organism in a mars rock but I am not sure.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    The disparate floods myths I mentioned generally include elements such as survivors from more advanced civilisations helping to sort out the mess afterwards. Then there is some archeological evidence like Yonaguni (sp?) off the coast of Japan (that was submerged c. 10000BC), and loads of ruins off the coast of south India, but marine archaeology has only just started to take off and has hardly scratched the surface.
    Yeah, thats the stuff. This Isle of Moo was underwater. They showed film of what they said was a temple that was 1000s of years old etc.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moncal)
    That's it exactly, I can't figure out how it could happen here and result in intelligent thinking beings and yet can't even produce a microscopic lifeform somewhere else? Could you please tell me how this could be? Please, clear it up for me.
    Basicly, it could have happened anywhere but because it is so unlikely it only happened at a few disticnt places (one of thsoe places being the earth). Had it happened on mercury rather than the earth, the mercurians would wonder why it didnt happen on earth. The bottom line is that it could have happened anywhere, but because of its low probability it only happened here. If you thre six dice, it is very unlikely for all to show six. Therefore you will not question why one of the dice could show a six when none of the others did.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    How many stars are there out there? A lot! We choose a set of 9 (or is it 10) planets, one of which has life on it, to make assumptions about life. We aren't really in the best position to determine how abundant life is!
    if every you take all the beaches on this world and counted the number of grains of sand on them, that is the number of stars in the universe, many have no planets orbiting them, others more than one, with so many possible localtions life most be out there IMO
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    How many stars are there out there? A lot! We choose a set of 9 (or is it 10) planets, one of which has life on it, to make assumptions about life. We aren't really in the best position to determine how abundant life is!
    I know. Some of my friend think I am crazy because I believe in Aliens. I don't believe they have made contact or come to earth just that they are out there somewhere. Thats another theory though isn't it. That the first humans were aliens who came and colonised earth. Personally I think it is a load of rubbish but some people believe it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    How many stars are there out there? A lot! We choose a set of 9 (or is it 10) planets, one of which has life on it, to make assumptions about life. We aren't really in the best position to determine how abundant life is!
    Quite right, it is almost a certainty that there is life out there. How advanced or not we don't know, simply because we have yet to see any other life in space. But to merely dismiss the idea of another planet supporting life is stupidity. Something that creationists do at will
 
 
 
Poll
Do protests make a difference in political decisions?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.