grok
Honorary Master
I'm so tired of reading all the arguments for and against, I'm inclined henceforth to stop believing in both just so the threads about it would go away.
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
See?
I usually stop once Techne joins. Its the something over and over.
http://thinking-critically.com/2010/07/08/theory-scientific-vs-laymans-definition/A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a vice.
You forgot to add a few hundred religions. We'll have to make biology classes hours long though.I concur.
![]()
If you teach one you must teach the other.
They are the opposite faces of the same coin, they are opposing views on the same question : "Where did we come from ?".
Laws, principles, theories, hypotheses and conjectures
In science all of these terms have different shades of meaning but none of them are cast in stone.
Karl Popper described one of the characteristics of a scientific theory as follows:
http://thinking-critically.com/2010/07/08/theory-scientific-vs-laymans-definition/
HOW EVOLUTION BECAME A RELIGION
http://www.omniology.com/HowEvolutionBecameR eligion.html
IMHO, the question is really pointless anyway, who cares where we came from, rather care about where we are heading
You have to know where you came from otherwise how are you going to know if you are going forward or backwards?
This is a SCIENCE class. There is only ONE currently valid explanation in the scientific community.If you teach one you must teach the other.
They are the opposite faces of the same coin, they are opposing views on the same question : "Where did we come from ?".
ROFL awesome.I concur.
![]()
Hence why Creationism is not a scientific theory.A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a vice.
Hence why Creationism is not a scientific theory.
Hence why Creationism is not a scientific theory.
Hence Intelligent Design isn't the Intelligent Design Theory.
But something from nothing is?
Evolution doesn't say anything like that.
Askies I was thinking about the big bang but we both know that they are interlinked.
They're not interlinked? The Big Bang says nothing about evolution and vice versa.
In that case my original statement stands , your first living creature came from nothing?
Abiogenesis. Still nothing to do with evolution.
Making up a name for something stupid doesn't make it true ,however fancy the name may be.