Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

If it's all settled, why is it still called the "theory" of evolution?
1 posted on 02/19/2015 12:10:25 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last
To: 2ndDivisionVet
Law Professor Charles J. Reid, Jr.

For sure an expert on biology ...

2 posted on 02/19/2015 12:13:24 PM PST by NorthMountain ("The time has come", the Walrus said, "to talk of many things")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

That really is a mistaken belief. “Theory” in science doesn’t mean what “theory” means in everyday parlance.

However, the real question is, if the theory is so well established, why does it matter if anyone believes in it or not? Do we go around quizzing people as to whether they believe in the theory of electromagnetism or the laws of thermodynamics? If it’s a true description of nature, then it doesn’t matter whether non-scientists believe it or not. Belief only matters if you are trying to promote a belief system.


3 posted on 02/19/2015 12:14:25 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The science is settled when the liberal realizes he’s losing and starts screaming about science deniers.


6 posted on 02/19/2015 12:18:13 PM PST by cripplecreek ("For by wise guidance you can wage your war")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Nothing is ever settled in science. A theory is a scientific model with some supporting evidence. Darwin’s Origin of Species is really an hypothesis - an educated guess based observation forming a scientific question. Those who pretend that evolution is “settled” science are really revolting against the Christian religion and moral culture.


7 posted on 02/19/2015 12:18:27 PM PST by captain_dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Homosexuality and evolution cannot be reconciled. You can have one or the other, but you can’t have both. So I think the Left has to pick which fallacy it is going to support.


8 posted on 02/19/2015 12:19:34 PM PST by kaehurowing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

They forget that God was the first scientist. He’s got them all beat.


9 posted on 02/19/2015 12:20:13 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

But there definitely are

Islam Terrorism deniers!


10 posted on 02/19/2015 12:20:45 PM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“the debate is heating up over an unexpected issue — the theory of evolution.”

Because this is the most pressing issue facing the nation today, right?


13 posted on 02/19/2015 12:22:09 PM PST by rightwingcrazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The 2016 presidential campaign is already upon us and the debate is heating up over an unexpected issue -- the theory of evolution.

A convenient strawman argument has been concocted to oppose Republican candidates.

Only the GOP gets asked religious questions in the debates.

Barack Obama wasn't made to answer matters of faith in the debates. "Do you believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead and walks among men?"

15 posted on 02/19/2015 12:23:27 PM PST by a fool in paradise (Shickl-Gruber's Big Lie gave us Hussein's Un-Affordable Care act (HUAC).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
If it's all settled, why is it still called the "theory" of evolution?

Why is it called the "theory" of flight? Or the "theory" of gravity?

16 posted on 02/19/2015 12:23:33 PM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The left has never been about open and honest debate with intelligence and respect for opponents.

They'd much rather just send those with whom they disagree to gulags.

God help us when these people achieve full control.

18 posted on 02/19/2015 12:23:49 PM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The toughest thing for evolutionists to explain is how an abstraction like the genetic code came into being without an intelligence to assign meaning to its components. No one would seriously try to argue that our 26-letter alphabet is the result of random chance, yet it is infinitely less complex than DNA. And without intelligence to assign meaning and rules of use to what we identify as a “letter A”, for example, the shapes that we call letters within our alphabet would be powerless to convey information. They would be meaningless blobs.

The same goes for DNA and it’s incredibly complex system to encode, store, and decode information as well as its built-in error correction mechanisms. Alleged evolution of the chemical components of DNA is one thing (though still impossible), but evolution of the information that rides upon them and the rules for applying that information to do work can only originate from a superior intelligence.


19 posted on 02/19/2015 12:24:05 PM PST by noiseman (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Of course, in an ideal world, evolution would never really become a campaign issue.

OF COURSE
In an ideal world, we would all know that global warming is real and there would be no deniers.

We would all know that a fetus is not a person and no one should be cursed with a baby.

We would all know that white males are responsible for all the worlds ills.

And we would all know that President Obama is the greatest President this country has ever had and will ever have.

Is a sarcasm tag really necessary.
22 posted on 02/19/2015 12:24:48 PM PST by wbarmy (I chose to be a sheepdog once I saw what happens to the sheep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Plenty of Jihad deniers in the White Mosque though.


25 posted on 02/19/2015 12:25:55 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
No Republican politician or candidate I'm aware of is trying to start a "debate" on evolution. The Democrats are trying to goad us into debating an absolutely irrelevant issue. Because NONE of their policies are working and they are desperate to change the subject.

Problem is, some in the stupid party will take the bait.

28 posted on 02/19/2015 12:27:04 PM PST by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Of course their aren’t. Just those who deny the true nature of Islam.


29 posted on 02/19/2015 12:27:15 PM PST by Politicalkiddo ("Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." -George Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

There are still a lot of open questions, especially regarding the Cambrian Explosion.

One thing is certain. I sure wouldn’t seek any science news from the Huffington Post.


33 posted on 02/19/2015 12:30:54 PM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Law Professor Charles J. Reid, Jr., University of St. Thomas

I see that the distinguished professor of law is qualified in scientific matters, after all, he has a law degree. Never mind that he doesn't have or espouse to have a degree in biology or related sciences.

To: Esquire Reid, stupid, mental midget:

There is not a theory of evolution. That's right, you political hack. There are multiple theories of evolution and amongst scientists with real degrees there is debate to which theory is correct. Perhaps you refer to Darwinism, one of the oldest theories of evolution. Darwinism is considered by most scientists as obsolete.

So, shut your liberal trap.

34 posted on 02/19/2015 12:31:33 PM PST by ConservativeInPA (#JuSuisCharlesMartel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

As I was heading out into another sub-zero morning, I was pondering the gravitational pull of the our sun.

Now perhaps I’m naive, but it seems remarkable to me that we have maintained an optimal distance from our sun - for supposedly billions of years.

I’ve never seen one, but if someone is a aware of a chart or graphic showing the livable min-max zone in which human life on this planet is possible - I’d like to see it.

The reason it it interesting to me is that if there is an increase - or decay - of the our sun’s gravitational pull - of just a small amount, before two long (an eon or two), we would drift outside the livable zone...


36 posted on 02/19/2015 12:33:14 PM PST by jonno (Having an opinion is not the same as having the answer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The left is the one that doesn’t care about science.

They were for abortion when “science” believed during pregnancy the baby “evolved” through different non-humna stages of beign other things until near the end it looked like a person, so you could abort up until that time and you were not killing a person.

Science has not supported any of the crazy rationalized arguments pro-aborts have had to retreat to over the years. Having no scientific basis for any of their arguments hasn’t stopped them from lusting after abortion. They have been proven wrong in every scientific defense they’ve offered for abortion. They claimed it’s safer for women than childbirth. It is not. They’ve said it has no harmful effects to women physically after one. It has multiple harmful effects. They said they baby wasn’t human before x weeks so abort it. DNA shows it is from conception. They claimed it wasn’t a separate person. By DNA it is. They claim it cannot feel pain so it’s okay to do it. Science has shown they do feel pain and fight against being torn apart. They don’t care science does not support any of their positions even though early on in the pro-abort movement they claimed science would prove their beliefs were right. they ignore science when it doesn’t fit the bill. Today many are willing to admit it’s murder but they do not care, it is now a “legal” “right” to commit such murder.

Tell me Republicans don’t care about science because we believe the Bible. I believe the Bible because mankind is flawed, fallible, and makes assumptions about things that cloud the worldview people have. Our greatest scientific minds see harmony between science and the Creator, who is the greatest engineer, the greatest scientist, the greatest mathematical genius, the greatest architect and planner, the greatest logic intelligence, ever. As do I.


37 posted on 02/19/2015 12:33:46 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson