He's hurt, now. After dishing it out in the rudest most dismissive terms himself, he's gone into a sulk. Poor zinfella.
And I was being nice to him. I don't expect anyone who is 70yo to change their ways or to change the bigotry that was taught to them so long ago. I figure that as you start to lose things with age that perhaps even the hatred you were taught as a kid is worth holding on to for some sencse of comfort. I guess he didn't like my attempt to be humorous when I mentioned getting his fill at bath houses.
The problem here stems from saying that it is "only" a theory. By saying that evolution is just a theory not a fact they are showing their utter ignorance on what a theory is in the scientific world.
In reality a theory is a higher level of understanding than facts because what theories do is explain the facts, they unite them.
Well, evolution is a theory. The problem here stems from saying that it is "only" a theory. By saying that evolution is just a theory not a fact they are showing their utter ignorance on the matter because in fact in science a theory is a higher level of understanding than facts. What theories do is explain the facts, they unite them.
If people want to get philosophical, we can say that absolutely nothing is certain or can be proven, but by a combination of scientific analysis and a smidgen of Ocam's Razor, we can say things are so highly likely, that they're as likely to be true and anything we're aware of. Evolution is one of those things.
Of course at this point, Creationists get all clever and point out that evolutionary theory as proposed by Darwin got some things wrong (as did Galileo and Newton for that matter). But for all intent and purpose, it is an accepted truth amongst anyone serious about studying the natural world.
Science is just a method of observing the world, empirically. I don't think it claims to define what is fact, only what can be observed, repeatedly.
Well, evolution is a theory. The problem here stems from saying that it is "only" a theory. By saying that evolution is just a theory not a fact they are showing their utter ignorance on what a theory is in the scientific world. In reality a theory is a higher level of understanding than facts because what theories do is explain the facts, they unite them.
Theory and hypothesis often get used incorrectly, but on these forums I never begrudge a colloquial definition if I know what the writer meant.
Theory and hypothesis often get used incorrectly, but on these forums I never begrudge a colloquial definition if I know what the writer meant.
Even though I quoted Zoolook the response was directed at the bigoted brigade we have here in this forum who like to dismiss things for being "just a theory not a fact".
of course at this point, Creationists get all clever and point out that evolutionary theory as proposed by Darwin got some things wrong (as did Galileo and Newton for that matter). But for all intent and purpose, it is an accepted truth amongst anyone serious about studying the natural world.
Speaking of, I find it humorous that it wasn't until 1984 that the Pope finally said "Opps! Our bad, Dog!" regarding Galileo's imprisonment for heresy in stating and never renouncing his findings that the Earth was not the center of the Universe. Amazing that people will follow a religion that is historically so clearly wrong on so many levels and has committed so many atrocities to keep its reign in tact.
Quote:
Science is just a method of observing the world, empirically. I don't think it claims to define what is fact, only what can be observed, repeatedly.
Don't forget experimentation as part of the Scientific Method.
Don't forget experimentation as part of the Scientific Method.
Exactly, the recording and organization of phenomena through the Scientific Method establishes what we commonly refer to as 'facts'... more or less. This thread's got some serious legs! heh heh.
I actually liked your original quote.
Quote:
I never begrudge a colloquial definition if I know what the writer meant.
It's pretty common on forums for people to pick apart each others words to crowbar and argument, where there isn't one, even though I understand Londor was agreeing with me - and he's right to note that the key word in that sentence, which gives it just enough sarcasm to get noticed, is "just".
For those in the US, just think,in a couple of days we'll be celebrating a president who believes that life begins at 40!
Well lets hope so, because the alternative is one who may demonstrate that life ends at 72, and we'll have a president who thinks that polar bears are demons!
Well lets hope so, because the alternative is one who may demonstrate that life ends at 72, and we'll have a president who thinks that polar bears are demons!
...and who believes that all life began 4000 years ago.
Possibly in reference to Obama's comment on abortion (he said life begins at 40 days, or words to that effect, when asked when an unborn baby (fetus) should be given human rights).
Of course, the other side think that human rights should be given at conception... and then taken away again at 16...
Possibly in reference to Obama's comment on abortion (he said life begins at 40 days, or words to that effect, when asked when an unborn baby (fetus) should be given human rights).
Gotcha. I read '40' as 40 years old, so I thought it was a reference to something McCain may have said since he is well over 40yo.
Quote:
and then taken away again at 16...
PS: Classic episode...
Kramer: "It's not a pizza until it comes out of the oven!"
Poppie: "It's a pizza the moment you put your fists in the dough!"
I didn't know Obama had said that. I wander how Obama came to that conclusion?But,you got it. Your earlier 91% of mosquitos post was the best,I'm saving it!
As irrelevant as Marxism is to the current discussion (unless you're a nutjob), since it was brought up....
Does anybody but me see an analogy between the tactics of the wingnut "base" of the Republican party and Lenin's lunatic fringe splinter faction of the Russian Social Democratic Workers' Party winning one minor vote at a poorly attended Party Congress and then forever after calling themselves Bolsheviki: "Men of the Majority?"
As irrelevant as Marxism is to the current discussion (unless you're a nutjob), since it was brought up....
Does anybody but me see an analogy between the tactics of the wingnut "base" of the Republican party and Lenin's lunatic fringe splinter faction of the Russian Social Democratic Workers' Party winning one minor vote at a poorly attended Party Congress and then forever after calling themselves Bolsheviki: "Men of the Majority?"
The silent majority is all the minority have left!
I didn't know Obama had said that. I wander how Obama came to that conclusion?
I postulate that he may have come to that conclusion by way of scientific data that suggests that the average human child moves from the embryonic to the fetal stage at around 50 days. The statement of 40 days would be a safe measure to not pass the threshold of this prenatal determination while also tying in Christian and Judaic use of 40 days.
I postulate that he may have come to that conclusion by way of scientific data that suggests that the average human child moves from the embryonic to the fetal stage at around 50 days. The statement of 40 days would be a safe measure to not pass the threshold of this prenatal determination while also tying in Christian and Judaic use of 40 days.
Thanks for that link,I'm going to read it more thoroughly soon.In the mean time you don't know what the stem cell researchers use do you? Those wee things look well developed to me.
OK, at first googling it seems,at the moment that they use embryos 6-8 days old, a cluster of 180 to 200 cells, but I'll find out more.
I thought that Obama had said that he believes life begins at conception, not 40 days!
As far as I'm concerned Obama was correct in saying he didn't know when life begins,treating it with the reverence it deserves by defining it as a choice to believe in, when the soul stirs? when the cells divide? etc,etc and etc. That's a very honest answer in my book and not a cop-out.It draws a link to our difficulty in accepting the true complexity of an organic universe and our personal responsibility to remain open to understanding it.
Comments
He's hurt, now. After dishing it out in the rudest most dismissive terms himself, he's gone into a sulk. Poor zinfella.
And I was being nice to him. I don't expect anyone who is 70yo to change their ways or to change the bigotry that was taught to them so long ago. I figure that as you start to lose things with age that perhaps even the hatred you were taught as a kid is worth holding on to for some sencse of comfort. I guess he didn't like my attempt to be humorous when I mentioned getting his fill at bath houses.
44 percent claim that evolution is only a theory;
Well, evolution is a theory.
The problem here stems from saying that it is "only" a theory. By saying that evolution is just a theory not a fact they are showing their utter ignorance on what a theory is in the scientific world.
In reality a theory is a higher level of understanding than facts because what theories do is explain the facts, they unite them.
Well, evolution is a theory. The problem here stems from saying that it is "only" a theory. By saying that evolution is just a theory not a fact they are showing their utter ignorance on the matter because in fact in science a theory is a higher level of understanding than facts. What theories do is explain the facts, they unite them.
If people want to get philosophical, we can say that absolutely nothing is certain or can be proven, but by a combination of scientific analysis and a smidgen of Ocam's Razor, we can say things are so highly likely, that they're as likely to be true and anything we're aware of. Evolution is one of those things.
Of course at this point, Creationists get all clever and point out that evolutionary theory as proposed by Darwin got some things wrong (as did Galileo and Newton for that matter). But for all intent and purpose, it is an accepted truth amongst anyone serious about studying the natural world.
Science is just a method of observing the world, empirically. I don't think it claims to define what is fact, only what can be observed, repeatedly.
Well, evolution is a theory. The problem here stems from saying that it is "only" a theory. By saying that evolution is just a theory not a fact they are showing their utter ignorance on what a theory is in the scientific world. In reality a theory is a higher level of understanding than facts because what theories do is explain the facts, they unite them.
Theory and hypothesis often get used incorrectly, but on these forums I never begrudge a colloquial definition if I know what the writer meant.
Theory and hypothesis often get used incorrectly, but on these forums I never begrudge a colloquial definition if I know what the writer meant.
Even though I quoted Zoolook the response was directed at the bigoted brigade we have here in this forum who like to dismiss things for being "just a theory not a fact".
of course at this point, Creationists get all clever and point out that evolutionary theory as proposed by Darwin got some things wrong (as did Galileo and Newton for that matter). But for all intent and purpose, it is an accepted truth amongst anyone serious about studying the natural world.
Speaking of, I find it humorous that it wasn't until 1984 that the Pope finally said "Opps! Our bad, Dog!" regarding Galileo's imprisonment for heresy in stating and never renouncing his findings that the Earth was not the center of the Universe. Amazing that people will follow a religion that is historically so clearly wrong on so many levels and has committed so many atrocities to keep its reign in tact.
Science is just a method of observing the world, empirically. I don't think it claims to define what is fact, only what can be observed, repeatedly.
Don't forget experimentation as part of the Scientific Method.
Don't forget experimentation as part of the Scientific Method.
Exactly, the recording and organization of phenomena through the Scientific Method establishes what we commonly refer to as 'facts'... more or less. This thread's got some serious legs! heh heh.
I actually liked your original quote.
I never begrudge a colloquial definition if I know what the writer meant.
It's pretty common on forums for people to pick apart each others words to crowbar and argument, where there isn't one, even though I understand Londor was agreeing with me - and he's right to note that the key word in that sentence, which gives it just enough sarcasm to get noticed, is "just".
For those in the US, just think,in a couple of days we'll be celebrating a president who believes that life begins at 40!
Well lets hope so, because the alternative is one who may demonstrate that life ends at 72, and we'll have a president who thinks that polar bears are demons!
For those in the US, just think,in a couple of days we'll be celebrating a president who believes that life begins at 40!
I don't follow. Could you clarify that.
Well lets hope so, because the alternative is one who may demonstrate that life ends at 72, and we'll have a president who thinks that polar bears are demons!
...and who believes that all life began 4000 years ago.
I don't follow. Could you clarify that.
Possibly in reference to Obama's comment on abortion (he said life begins at 40 days, or words to that effect, when asked when an unborn baby (fetus) should be given human rights).
Of course, the other side think that human rights should be given at conception... and then taken away again at 16...
I don't follow. Could you clarify that.
It was a jab at all the moral crusaders, more determined to save the life of an embryo over research into diseases to cure children and adults.
It was a jab at all the moral crusaders, more determined to save the life of an embryo over research into diseases to cure children and adults.
I was right! High Five... yeah...
Possibly in reference to Obama's comment on abortion (he said life begins at 40 days, or words to that effect, when asked when an unborn baby (fetus) should be given human rights).
Gotcha. I read '40' as 40 years old, so I thought it was a reference to something McCain may have said since he is well over 40yo.
and then taken away again at 16...
PS: Classic episode...
Kramer: "It's not a pizza until it comes out of the oven!"
Poppie: "It's a pizza the moment you put your fists in the dough!"
I was right! High Five... yeah...
I didn't know Obama had said that. I wander how Obama came to that conclusion?But,you got it. Your earlier 91% of mosquitos post was the best,I'm saving it!
Does anybody but me see an analogy between the tactics of the wingnut "base" of the Republican party and Lenin's lunatic fringe splinter faction of the Russian Social Democratic Workers' Party winning one minor vote at a poorly attended Party Congress and then forever after calling themselves Bolsheviki: "Men of the Majority?"
As irrelevant as Marxism is to the current discussion (unless you're a nutjob), since it was brought up....
Does anybody but me see an analogy between the tactics of the wingnut "base" of the Republican party and Lenin's lunatic fringe splinter faction of the Russian Social Democratic Workers' Party winning one minor vote at a poorly attended Party Congress and then forever after calling themselves Bolsheviki: "Men of the Majority?"
The silent majority is all the minority have left!
I didn't know Obama had said that. I wander how Obama came to that conclusion?
I postulate that he may have come to that conclusion by way of scientific data that suggests that the average human child moves from the embryonic to the fetal stage at around 50 days. The statement of 40 days would be a safe measure to not pass the threshold of this prenatal determination while also tying in Christian and Judaic use of 40 days.
I postulate that he may have come to that conclusion by way of scientific data that suggests that the average human child moves from the embryonic to the fetal stage at around 50 days. The statement of 40 days would be a safe measure to not pass the threshold of this prenatal determination while also tying in Christian and Judaic use of 40 days.
Thanks for that link,I'm going to read it more thoroughly soon.In the mean time you don't know what the stem cell researchers use do you? Those wee things look well developed to me.
OK, at first googling it seems,at the moment that they use embryos 6-8 days old, a cluster of 180 to 200 cells, but I'll find out more.
I thought that Obama had said that he believes life begins at conception, not 40 days!
As far as I'm concerned Obama was correct in saying he didn't know when life begins,treating it with the reverence it deserves by defining it as a choice to believe in, when the soul stirs? when the cells divide? etc,etc and etc. That's a very honest answer in my book and not a cop-out.It draws a link to our difficulty in accepting the true complexity of an organic universe and our personal responsibility to remain open to understanding it.