manga04_jpg login_tab_left_jpg
Username:   Password:    Forgot Password?
App
Try out our new iPhone application!
App
Manga Poll
For background art in manga, you prefer...
Lots of detail
An average amount of detail
Very little detail
Sparkles and patterns that fit the mood is just fine
I don't really pay attention to the backgrounds
I don't care
 
See Old Polls

Manga is the Japanese equivalent of comics
with a unique style and following. Join the revolution! Read some manga today!

Coded in ConTEXT

Join #baka-updates @irc.irchighway.net

RSS Feed
 
center_left_tab Forums center_right_tab

You are now viewing a topic.

Evolution faith//fact?

Back to Chatter Box


Poll
Do you think evolution is a faith?
Yes
No
Don't know/care
You must login to vote.

Pages (9) [ First ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next You must be registered to post!
From User Message Body
mattai
Post #513119 - Reply to (#513116) by JustPassingBy
user avatar
Member

7:22 pm, Dec 18 2011
Posts: 612


Quote from JustPassingBy
Quote from wolfinthesheep
Quote from JustPassingBy
Science is faith. It might've been veryfied hundreds of thousands of times on different occassions under different circumstances in different areas, however that does not mean it is true. There is a reason why mathematicians start with a system of axioms (e.g. natural numbers exist) saying "okay, this is what we believe is true and we start building our theories from those chosen axioms, for we cannot prove that something is true out of nothing.".

The difference between science and religion is that logic governs all, however that does not make it true.

This is entirely false. Science is built up from observations of occurrences that are experienced, and Math is built from defined representations for concepts. Absolutely none of them are assumptions that could or could not be true. The theory of gravity was created from the observations that objects fall towards the earth, 1+1=2 is built from the definitions of the numbers that represent objects, etc.

The Theory of Evolution is not accepted as "faith". It's accepted as the best explanation for all observed facts, excluding absolutely none, with the understanding that they Theory will be modified or thrown out entirely if contradictions arise.

At no point in science are you asked to believe in things with no facts and evidence supporting them, and at no point are you asked to believe in them without compromise.


Yes, but because science is build up from observations and is based on logic, that does not make it true. I can throw a coin a million times, always yielding heads, and even if you only observed heads, and hence might conclude that tails is not an option, it is only because we were in that unprobably case with probability 2^(-1000000). You cannot say it is true just because all observation up till now hint towards it being true, because you cannot exclude the possibility of a counterexample showing up at sometime in the future.


That's the thing. If the coin did land as tails, the theory would be overturned. If you had 'faith' in the coin only being able to land as heads, you'd see it land tails and say "God's just trying to test me! It's actually heads in disguise!"

________________
"It is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
JustPassingBy
Post #513141 - Reply to (#513119) by mattai
Member

11:45 pm, Dec 18 2011
Posts: 54


Quote from mattai
Quote from JustPassingBy
Quote from wolfinthesheep
Quote from JustPassingBy
Science is faith. It might've been veryfied hundreds of thousands of times on different occassions under different circumstances in different areas, however that does not mean it is true. There is a reason why mathematicians start with a system of axioms (e.g. natural numbers exist) saying "okay, this is what we believe is true and we start building our theories from those chosen axioms, for we cannot prove that something is true out of nothing.".

The difference between science and religion is that logic governs all, however that does not make it true.

This is entirely false. Science is built up from observations of occurrences that are experienced, and Math is built from defined representations for concepts. Absolutely none of them are assumptions that could or could not be true. The theory of gravity was created from the observations that objects fall towards the earth, 1+1=2 is built from the definitions of the numbers that represent objects, etc.

The Theory of Evolution is not accepted as "faith". It's accepted as the best explanation for all observed facts, excluding absolutely none, with the understanding that they Theory will be modified or thrown out entirely if contradictions arise.

At no point in science are you asked to believe in things with no facts and evidence supporting them, and at no point are you asked to believe in them without compromise.


Yes, but because science is build up from observations and is based on logic, that does not make it true. I can throw a coin a million times, always yielding heads, and even if you only observed heads, and hence might conclude that tails is not an option, it is only because we were in that unprobably case with probability 2^(-1000000). You cannot say it is true just because all observation up till now hint towards it being true, because you cannot exclude the possibility of a counterexample showing up at sometime in the future.


That's the thing. If the coin did land as tails, the theory would be overturned. If you had 'faith' in the coin only being able to land as heads, you'd see it land tails and say "God's just trying to test me! It's actually heads in disguise!"


Huh? Guess so, but that was not what I was getting at.

My bottom line: you can observe whatever you want, how many times you want. But just because something happened who-knows-how-many-times, does not mean it must happen again. People need to realize that evolution is not a fact.
Is it a faith? Yes, because there is no solid proof that it is right, and you need to believe in it. But it is one of those "faiths" that was gotten through continuous observation and logical deduction. Hence it is the type of faith we call "theory". It does not need to be true, but all our observations till now verify it and it explains our world nicely through logic, if you assume that our previous observation are "true".

red255
Post #513145
Member

12:28 am, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 215


Evolution can be a faith, if you believe in some sense we will eventually evolve into god, (or one individual organism will) and that evolved being will create the universe for the purpose of creating itself (it would evolve to be able to manipulate time and space as its well, god)

Evolution doesn't seem to work that way, but scientology for instance believes people can ascend to godhood if they pay for enough courses, so I won't doubt its a religion.

But from your initial post you seem to think it hasn't been PROVEN.

We can control it to domesticate and breed animals, and have been doing so since just after hunter gather stage. We can see it work when we attempt to kill off bacteria cultures. to say it doesn't exist means you are choosing not to look.

Now if you want to say humans don't evolve (thats silly) or humans didn't evolve from a common ancestor from chimps (debatable) it generally means you don't know what evolution MEANS as it wasn't taught in your schools and you learned it from bad movies.

Right now humans are evolving into diabetics, why? because the world isn't killing the diabetics off.

Should some change in the world occur where diabetics get killed off, the non-diabetics will live and breed. Other changes might leave only diabetics. its evolution.

although humans don't really evolve because humans are products of artificial selection. cuz we are humans.

@just passing by.

The analogy I was told from your statement is... imagine a chicken and a farmer.

every day in the chicken's life, the farmer comes and feeds the chicken.
on the day the farmer comes to slaughter the chicken, he has no reason to believe the farmer will slaughter him from past events.

So you can use that arguement just because its been that way since live existed, doesn't mean one day God might come down and change things to fit his purposes. Or maybe he screwed with the historical record.

Maybe there is no time but the very instance you are living in.

and then you get into the "I think therefore I am" stuff of existance itself.

the point is, if you want to believe tomorrow won't follow today, FINE believe that. I'll concede the point.

However its a safe bet that it will.

QuasarX
Post #513151
Member

1:25 am, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 169


Such a false dichotomy... "faith" and "fact" are not opposites, and in fact, have nothing to do with each other.

FormX
Post #513154 - Reply to (#513065) by WandereroftheDeep
user avatar
Member

2:13 am, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 678


Quote from WandereroftheDeep
Quote from FormX
Quote from WandereroftheDeep
And let me just point out that "Intelligent Design" is a sorry excuse for a scientific theory, because the Bible and evolutionary theory really aren't compatible; a key feature of evolutionary theory is that it happens spontaniously, and so it excludes the possibility of divine intervention. But if they wish to willfully decieve themselves that's their problem, and I wish they would stop trying to make it everyone else's problem too.


LOL. Usually people say "the Bible and science aren't compatible". If you didn't know, "Intelligent Design" isn't trying to connect evolution and the Bible.

-cut


Just stop. Why are you looking for the definition of Intelligent Design in a dictionary? I would look for a definition for evolution in a textbook. Those that advocate Intelligent Design can give you a better definition for it, and most would tell you the designer did not use evolution.

________________
"I'll shut your mouth~~~~~ with mine~~~"

二息歩行
Antiquely
Post #513163 - Reply to (#513073) by RockIronrod
user avatar
Member

2:45 am, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 45


Quote from RockIronrod
Faith is defined as belief in something without evidence.
There is evidence for evolution. Objectively, evolution is not faith.

Also, Intelligent Design is not a theory close to challenging evolution, any more than my theory of invisible tentacles being the reason we're attached to the earth is competition for gravity. It has no foundation or reason behind it, and literally relies soley on faith. Give proof of an intelligent designer and then it can be counted as a legitimate theory. Until then, it's just a terrible mash up of religion and science, and it doesn't even have cool space marines to make it attractive.

Quote from Antiquely
Quote from WandereroftheDeep
Evolution is a fact unless proven otherwise, as is the case with all scientific theories.


Actually, this is incorrect. Evolution is not a 'fact', it is what it implies which is a theory. A theory is not a fact. A theory by definition is "a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact."

You don't seem to understand what a scientific theory is. While it is called a "theory", it actually a fact. For example, the theory of gravity is confirmed. It is absolute fact that it exists. It's not a thought experiment or an idea. It's confirmed to the truest definition of the word.
Evolution is the same. It is accepted as truth.


I understand perfectly what a theory is, believe me when I say that I am highly reversed in such topics. A theory is NOT a fact, if you look at even the first phrase of the definition from the dictionary "a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact."

Evolution is indeed still a theory which means it cannot be regarded as fact. Plus just so you know the "theory of gravity" doesn't exist anymore because we now have Newtons 2nd Law, also known as the law of gravity, it is not a theory. Laws and theories and two very different things. Laws are facts, theories are not and they cannot be used interchangeably.

If you choose to believe in the theory of evolution than that's nobodies business but your own. However, you can't go around accurately saying that everything you're putting forth is fact, because science is about discovery and change especially in regard to theories.

If you're still confused between the differences I suggest you read this page, it is very informative and should clarify things.

http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistry101/a/lawtheory.htm

Sorry for the long response, I just don't appreciate being told that I don't understand something, when in reality I know a lot about the subject.


WandereroftheDeep
Post #513226 - Reply to (#513154) by FormX
user avatar
Mmm...Tasty
Member

8:35 am, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 494


Quote from FormX
Just stop. Why are you looking for the definition of Intelligent Design in a dictionary? I would look for a definition for evolution in a textbook. .


Uh, because I live in the Netherlands in a place far away from the Bible Belt, so those who advocate Intelligent Design are nowhere in my vicinity.

Quote
Those that advocate Intelligent Design can give you a better definition for it, and most would tell you the designer did not use evolution


This is a crap argument: if they think the "designer" didn't use evolution, it wouldn't be "Intelligent Design" anymore, but just plain old creationism. I also bid you not to underestimate the efforts of lexicographers; before a lemma is added it will have been well researched, whereas the definition you will get from one person adhering Intelligent Design will most likely reflect personal beliefs as well, and textbooks written by people who believe in ID are biased; therefore, the dictionary meaning is much more reliable.

________________
User Posted Image
red255
Post #513257 - Reply to (#513163) by Antiquely
Member

1:52 pm, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 215


Quote from Antiquely
I understand perfectly what a theory is, believe me when I say that I am highly reversed in such topics. A theory is NOT a fact, if you look at even the first phrase of the definition from the dictionary...



Again. a theory is like Tommorrow will follow from today.

You want to argue tommorrow WON'T follow from today, maybe tomorrow gravity will push instead of pull

Nobody can predict the future with 100% accuracy. but if you don't take it as fact you can't take anything as fact, and you get trapped in the mental exercise of ancient times answered by Rene Descartes. where the only thing that you can be 100% sure of, is that you, whatever you are. can be defined by the fact that you think, therefore there must be something that is YOU. and everything else is subject to manipulation from higher powers who want to just be shitting with you for their own purposes.

YOU CAN BE THAT WAY. IF you understand you are being that way. fine.

But I'm getting the impression you have no clue what you are saying. reversed? Seriously you are well reversed? you mean Revered? Rehearsed?

But yeah, If we are going to make assumptions that tomorrow will follow from today and yesterday, next cycle behaves like previous cycle, and the definition that doing the same thing, with the same processes and expecting a different result is insanity.

then you are being insane. and Evolution is a fact.

But again, there is no PROOF Tommorrow will follow from today, and there WON'T BE until tommorrow becomes today, and then we got the next tommorrow to wait for.

So its only a theory. But you are being a tool.

Which is to say, Evolution the process of Natural and artificial selection are facts/laws/process/definition.

the Theory part is the part saying what WILL happen.

Last edited by red255 at 2:28 pm, Dec 19

Skinny Kazoo
Post #513288
user avatar
Member

7:37 pm, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 146


Quote
I live in a community where most people believe in creationism. Discussing evolution around here is like giving Jesus the finger. I never understood why believers feel that evolution is such a great threat, since astronomy and geology have done a wonderful job smashing biblical creationism.


As hilarious as I find this video (gave me a laugh for a good five minutes) , me being familiar with both sides of the argument, I can confidently say that biblical creationism was not "smashed"

On another note, the theory of evolution is based on a lot of observed facts. More specifically, micro evolution is and can be easily seen every day...macro evolution is the part which I say requires some faith to believe in, as its not based on observable, testable things.

the question from the OP was terribly phrased....the question is not about micro evolution, which even an idiot should agree exists, but about macro evolution


________________
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.
-Oath of the Night's Watch, A Song of Ice and Fire
tupelo_stevo
Post #513290 - Reply to (#513116) by JustPassingBy
Member

8:00 pm, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 47


Evolution is pure fact. I observe it virtually every day working as a clinical microbiologist.
See that MRSA thing the media always love to talk about?
Evolution in action children.

mixxi
Post #513293
Member

8:10 pm, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 302


it isnt a fact nor a faith

its a theory

and until proven wrong it wont be a faith
and in the same matter
until proven right it wont vbe a fact

simple right^^

Skinny Kazoo
Post #513299
user avatar
Member

8:27 pm, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 146


Quote
and until proven wrong it wont be a faith


Lmao....what a stupid, ignorant statement

________________
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.
-Oath of the Night's Watch, A Song of Ice and Fire
havoccc
Post #513301 - Reply to (#513141) by JustPassingBy
user avatar
Mad‮‮
Member

8:33 pm, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 225


Quote from JustPassingBy
Huh? Guess so, but that was not what I was getting at.

My bottom line: you can observe whatever you want, how many times you want. But just because something happened who-knows-how-many-times, does not mean it must happen again. People need to realize that evolution is not a fact.
Is it a faith? Yes, because there is no solid proof that it is right, and you need to believe in it. But it is one of those "faiths" that was gotten through continuous observation and logical deduction. Hence it is the type of faith we call "theory". It does not need to be true, but all our observations till now verify it and it explains our world nicely through logic, if you assume that our previous observation are "true".


That does not make it faith, that makes it a reasonable expectation.

Believing in a divine creator is not reasonable expectation, it is faith.

I do not take it on faith that the brakes on my car will work the next time I am out driving, I do not take it on faith that the sun will rise tomorrow; I have reasonable expectations that the brakes will work and the sun will rise, because I have no reason to believe anything is wrong with my car as I have taken care of it and there has been no indication of any fault, and astronomical observations tell me that the sun is not about to go out and we are, and will be, still spinning in orbit around it by tomorrow.

The gist of it being reasonable. I can reason, and prove to a certain degree, that something is or will happen.
Believing in the metaphysical, or transcendent beings, requires faith and is incompatible with reason and logic. Thus being unreasonable expectations.

Faith is believing in things without proof or reason, in fact most cases the display of faith is rejection of proof and reason. Evolution is very reasonable and has plenty proof.

tororo
Post #513312 - Reply to (#513145) by red255
Member

9:14 pm, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 43


Quote from red255
... but scientology for instance believes people can ascend to godhood if they pay for enough courses, so I won't doubt its a religion.



Hahaha, I laughed at this.

I agree that evolution is a theory.

________________
"...that ain't no unicorn" - Wakusei no Samidare
FormX
Post #513319 - Reply to (#513226) by WandereroftheDeep
user avatar
Member

9:36 pm, Dec 19 2011
Posts: 678


Quote from WandereroftheDeep
Quote from FormX
Just stop. Why are you looking for the definition of Intelligent Design in a dictionary? I would look for a definition for evolution in a textbook. .


Uh, because I live in the Netherlands in a place far away from the Bible Belt, so those who advocate Intelligent Design are nowhere in my vicinity.

Quote
Those that advocate Intelligent Design can give you a better definition for it, and most would tell you the designer did not use evolution


This is a crap argument: if they think the "designer" didn't use evolution, it wouldn't be "Intelligent Design" anymore, but just plain old creationism. I also bid you not to underestimate the efforts of lexicographers; before a lemma is added it will have been well researched, whereas the definition you will get from one person adhering Intelligent Design will most likely reflect personal beliefs as well, and textbooks written by people who believe in ID are biased; therefore, the dictionary meaning is much more reliable.


I don't think the Netherlands is far away from the Internet.

You having a problem with ID is not my problem or business, but you can't twist their beliefs as such. Done. If you want to get started with bias, can't you say all biology textbooks nowadays have an evolutionary bias? Of course you can just say it's science. But that's what we're all here for, aren't we.

________________
"I'll shut your mouth~~~~~ with mine~~~"

二息歩行
Pages (9) [ First ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next You must be registered to post!

Back to Chatter Box  Back to Top

Search This Topic:
 
Manga Search
MANGA Fu
MEMBERS
TEAM-BU


footer