Register :: Log in :: Profile :: Mail   
INSIDE SCIENCE: Evolution is a foundation of science

Home // Evolution Versus Creationism



Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Author Message
CryxicKiller
Known Associate
Known Associate


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 332

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Exton, no you cannot say the same of anything. Evolution is a natural process and this is easily recognized by biologists. Loosely speaking, scientific theories are a series of rules to explain a wide range of natural phenomena; evolution does not qualify at all. Evolution is just, again, a process; I cannot think of many other better terms to describe it. Now, natural selection can be thought of as a natural process, but it is a scientific theory nonetheless. Natural selection is a proposed mechanism for how evolution occurs, and this is one of the fundamental differences between that and evolution; 'evolution' as a term separated from other words does not have a mechanism. The definition of evolution is what I gave above. It is not special by itself because evolution is something obvious and easy to recognize, but we do need mature scientific theories to explain how it works. If you need more clarification on this distinction, don't hesitate to ask, but it is very important that we all understand it.

"The claim that "evolution is a natural process" is part of the theory of evolution."

Logical fallacy; you keep begging the question. We're debating about whether evolution is a natural theory, so you can't just take that position without showing why it's legitimate. Again, there's no such thing as a "theory of evolution." If you ever find something, let me know. The general problem that I'm noticing here is a laxity with the definition of certain terms that have quite respected and acknowledged histories. This brings me to Oolon.....

More precisely, gravity is actually an attractive force in the Newtonian theory of gravitation. However, our understanding of gravitation, which is the natural process, was revolutionized by Einstein. Cosmologists now no longer regard the concept of 'gravity' as anything special. That is, there is no such thing as gravity; it was just something postulated by Newton to make his system work, but it's recognized to be false now, or at least not as empirically or intellectually satisfying as fields, which replaced the use of forces in describing natural phenomena after Faraday. In this case, gravitation is the natural process and, to take one example, General Relativity is a scientific theory that gives a mechanism for how gravitation works. So gravity is not real at all.

To help some more in the distinction: natural processes, or what humans characterize as such, are mostly statements of fact, things like "species evolve" or "the cup drops to the ground when I release it from my hand." Those clearly are not scientific theories. Now, the words "law" were mentioned. This is something tricky because there are many statements in science that we call "laws" but that are no such thing. Newton's laws of motion, for example, are not correct; they are great approximations and can be used to accomplish wonderful tasks, like sending space probes to rendezvous with asteroids, but they do not encapsulate the intrinsic features of the Universe as well as other statements or theories. Other laws, like the conservation of energy, linear momentum, and angular momentum, are much more respected, trusted, and empirically compatible. A law is basically a curt statement that scientists have gained confidence in over time; it is distinguished from a theory in that it does not have the equivalent explanatory power.
Back to top
joeyjock
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 2108
Location: Fort Lauderdale

PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
There is no debate about evolution within the scientific community...it's so ingrained within the findings now that basically it IS now taken as law
so much of what we now know of the natural world is based on what we know as evolution
Genetics...various aspects of medicine
botany..ecology on and on all have various aspects of study rooted in evolutionary facts
to deny it's existence is denying the real world around you
Back to top
joeyjock
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 2108
Location: Fort Lauderdale

PostPosted: Tue May 01, 2007 3:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I just love how the religious wingnuts try to explain away something that the world is built on
...it's very much like the flat earthers or the anti-copernicans many years ago
Evolution is a mainstay in scientific study and goes beyond natural biology
without evolution you have no genetics...no genome project...no medical study...no bioengineering
BUT...when a bible thumpin' woman from Missouri goes to a fertility specialist and is inseminated with ten eggs and seven of them take....that's a gift from god....
and when her Doc says...ahem
you'll need to abort atleast five of them because they will not be able to form correctly and she says no ... how is that not child abuse???
Back to top


Post new topic   Reply to topic   Quick Reply    LVC Home // Evolution Versus Creationism All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

Add to My Yahoo! Add to Google

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites Politics Blogs Politics
Politics blogs Politics blogs Article Directory Political Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory Top Blog Sites