Evolution is Fact

[REASON]

Originally Posted by questor

and some see but do not comprehend.

Which is so often why they revert to seeing what they want to see.

[Moontanman]

[quote]

Originally Posted by questor

If all life began by some action in the ''primordial soup'', it would seem that this occurrence had a cause or happened by accident.

You are proceeding from a distorted and totally outdated premise. "Some action" implies a sudden "there was life" This has never been a part of abiogenesis theory. Life didn't suddenly start from nothing, newer theories cannot even be simplified in this manner. Life was a gradual process that at no one time could be split into "nonlife/life" many varied processes came together slowly to eventually produce life like chemistry that slowly became more and more lifelike. If you could go back in time and watch this whole process in real time there would be no way to suddenly point and say "there is life" and everything before this was nonlife, the process is a natural result of how the universe works. No one stood by and decided to start life at some point.

The same applies to the universe itself, there was a cause, or there wasn't ( if you believe in BB).
When I view spin, orbiting, gratity, time and countless other phenomenae that exist, I say this evidence of intelligence outweighs any evidence that it was all happenstance. As I said others may have evidence to the other side. I personally don't care which answer is correct, I just go with the flow.

Other people better versed in this part of theory will have to explain this not exactly my cup of tea.

[Buffy]

What questor is saying he believes has been refuted many times elsewhere.

At the same time, he's very clearly saying that its his personal view, and that is something he can't be denied.

You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think,
Buffy

[Galapagos]

I'm sure most of you heard about the recent findings from the team lead by Richard Lenski at Michigan State University, but I think it deserves a mention in this thread as it is a unique piece of evidence demonstrating the fact of evolution. Carl Zimmer at his blog The Loom covered it quite well a few weeks back:
A New Step In Evolution | The Loom | Discover Magazine

Also, I think this Stephen Jay Gould quote fits the theme of this thread very well:

Stephen Jay Gould "Evolution as Fact and Theory," 1994

Originally Posted by S Jay Gould

Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from apelike ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other, yet to be discovered.

Moreover, "fact" does not mean "absolute certainty." The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.

[questor]

Moon, you nor anyone else knows how life originally occurred. Common sense
would dictate that at some particulate level the ''spark'' of life was ignited. No one knows how or at what particulate level this occurred. Even now, no one knows at what level life exists or exactly what life is.

[questor]

Buffy, you are wrong is saying my observations have been refuted. No one has explained time, gravity, orbiting, spin, life, or come to a final decision on a final theory. We have only recently come to grips with quantum theory and we're struggling to meld this with GTR. Even if all these phenomenae are someday reduced to mathematical equations, the question still remains--- How? Who? Why? was all this originally put in motion?

[dkv]

Evolution is not a law(based on facts). Evolution is a theory.
In general no theory can be proved.
Evidences can only support a theory.. in other words a theory can never be considered a law.
However any new theory can only improve upon the old theory that is why even the old theories can survive.(e.g Newton's theory)

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by questor

you nor anyone else knows how life originally occurred. Common sense would dictate that at some particulate level the ''spark'' of life was ignited. No one knows how or at what particulate level this occurred. Even now, no one knows at what level life exists or exactly what life is.

This thread is about evolution, not biogenesis.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by freeztar

This thread is about evolution, not biogenesis.

Even so, that doesn't mean we should not work to counter falsehoods and attempt to educate everyone who stumbles here, leaving a better educated and more informed populace in our wake.

YouTube - The Origin of Life - Abiogenesis

And more:

Pharyngula: genesis

[nutronjon]

Originally Posted by Galapagos

People Are Not Animals! (and evolution never happened)

YouTube - People Are Not Animals! (and evolution never happened)


EVOLUTION= A LIE!!!!

If people are not animals, why do they share so much in common with animals, physically and mentally? Even morality is rooted in the animal realm. We are social animals as are primates and dogs, and that is the foundation of morality. I think all our human decisions would be much better if we accepted we are animals, with limited brains, that are pretty much like blank slates when we are born. We are born with the potential to learn, not with knowledge and developed skills and talents.

Many animals can not survive in the wild if they are not taught how to do this, and humans with their complex societies have much more to learn. We need to return to being much more gentle with each other, instead of having unrealistic expections of each other. I hate the realistic expectations we have of each other and our carelessness with raising children. I wish I had known what I know today before I had children, and how much of who we are is what we learn.

The problem with education for technology, is it has done a terrible job of teaching us how to be humans. Liberal education is much better at teaching us how to be humans. A better balance of education for technology and liberal education would be awesome. I keep hoping when we accept we are animals and must learn how to be civilized human beings we will do better. Our disagreements are largely the result of our different cultures and different learnings. We need to educate people to be more reasonable, instead of educating them to think of things as either right or wrong, and turning them into parts to serve the Borg. This would do a lot in ending the beligerence that comes with limited education for technology, and it is a far better way of preventing all social problems, than trying to prevent with laws and law enforcers.