What is the "Scientific Theory" of evolution...?

[kwikphilly]

Rusty

I want to add something,,,,,,,,,,I admire guys like Enoch & SavedOne byGrace,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,they are never EXCLUSIVE,,,,,even a layman can join in & either of them would take the time to explain something so one could understand(in simple terms),,,,,,,,,,,& it AINT always so simple       

[Kan]

4 hours ago, Enoch2021 said:

I didn't take it personally, I took it as a Fallacy (Appeal to Motive) which it is/was.  It's employed as a diversionary maneuver to side-track the discussion away from the main topic.

 

Listen, I've been on many forums through the years discussing these topics so I'm quite familiar with the games people play.  With some, there's a clear ulterior motive...its sometimes very subtle but very easy to sniff out.  With "Science" Topics there's a Metric Ton of "Pretenders", what I call "Wiki-Google" Scientists. They take what their Pseudo-Science Priests ("Mainstream Science" ) say and incessantly Parrot their Mantra's.  Of course "Mainstream Science" is, as we all know, GOD Deniers (aka: the hand of satan) that parade around with their alleged "Scientist" Credentials from these "so-called" disciplines:  paleontology, anthropology, archaeology, geology, evolutionary biology, theoretical physics 'non-experimental', and cosmology.  Crocheting is MORE SCIENTIFIC !! 

The majority of Joe Coffee's and Betty Breadmaker's don't have a "Science" background (or they think they do because they've been "educated") and they have been INDOCTRINATED since birth to revere "Science" which they then fallaciously associate the awesome Technological Advances of our age...which then justifies and reinforces their Indoctrinated Beliefs.  Well satan knows this simple Equivocation Fallacy with the term "Science", cause he planned it  that way !! Then when Joe Coffee and Betty Breadmaker here the call of The Lord and they go a searching (Maybe here @ Worthy ?) -- only to find Secular Society along with "Science" (which they've revered for many years) have all but put the "GOD myth" to bed.  They dare not say anything about this calling for fear of being Laughed @ , Ridiculed, and Peer-Pressured to the point of giving up.  It's even worse if they come across Professed "Christians" that echo the same things that they hear from the Pseudo-Scientists. That's where I COME IN, I'm a SHEEP DOG !!!

I EXPOSE the Fairytale Pseudo-Science Priests and their Followers for what they are... "FRAUDS".  From the Hallowed Halls of Academia to my kitchen table it makes no difference.  Since I have an extensive 'secular' academic and professional background in actual "REAL SCIENCE" and don't use the term merely as a "Punch Line", it's fairly simple to take their Paper Mache foundation arguments to the Woodshed.  I'm also Retired Military---half of which was spent in Combat Arms (Reconnaissance), so I am ALL TO FAMILIAR with Tactics, Diversions, Psychological Warfare, and KNOWING THE ENEMY. 

As you can imagine, these masqueraders don't like being EXPOSED so they attack veraciously, ya'll know the drill and tools of the trade: Name Calling, ad hominems, Diversions, Revisions, Fallacies till the cows come home ect ect ect. (University Professors are the worst, btw.)

Another very well established TACTIC used from antiquity is an attack from within (Infiltrate/Mole) we all know this and has been present in Christendom from the very beginning.  It's insidious---very very subtle but can wreak absolute havoc.

Now, am I saying 'post', you, or the handful of others here @ Worthy are in this category:  NOPE !  But I raise a "Sheep Dog" Eyebrow when I see Pseudo-Science (evolution, big bangs, secular mantra's) or "Science" Equivocated so as to allow the above identified masqueraders anywhere near a vapor of legitimacy.

Having said all that: I am quick to the point---don't mince words, and I LACK Patience (I am Human), this can be taken as Snobbish or Arrogant by some.  I'm just misunderstood .  I also don't take my role Lightly, this isn't some kind of GAME!!  People's Souls are @ stake. 

Hopefully that helps a bit with where I'm coming from.  

 

too funny

 

regards

Look I agree with you, and I have a rough idea of where you are coming from, you have an understanding of what constitutes true science vs the false. When people talk about science, it is pretty obvious that there are many other views about science which are 'true' in different circumstances, simply because there are false views of science even among scientists, if we can call them that - let alone the millions of sheep around them.

What I would like to see is a more rounded approach to other views, and I need to learn the same. You can still make a point through an illustration or an example, without attacking things like definitions, which again can be taken in a variety of ways, anything from a colloquial meaning to general misnomers. People usually don't listen well when confronted, they are too busy building armaments.

There is no doubt that what you see as a fallacy has to be confronted, and you do, but how successful is such a confrontation and is it getting through what you want?

The other thing is, that when you pack truth into a post, it can't be too long, because people speed read these days and don't contemplate what is written, they commonly misread. The days of careful readers are over. I'm guilty, I realize that I may have misread some of your posts and backed the wrong side.

Thanks for letting me know where you are at. I want to hear what you have to say, without having to wait until you have wrestled someone into the right corner. That's what I am saying, - just tell us the interesting stuff, and forget about who has what fallacy, because in the end truth is attractive to those who want it. 

I get why you want to attack a fallacy, because it is the very thought pattern which prevents the truth from coming in.

I am with you when it comes to Christians accepting pseudo sciences, as you call them, and I can understand your disappointment that genuine science is not seen for its value because of these pseudo sciences.

[Kan]

2 hours ago, kwikphilly said:

BTW,Kan,,,,,not talking about you,you have always been very kind & respectful to me,,,,,,,

That's because you are a mod...

[Bonky]

Enoch, if you really want to debate someone about the theory of evolution then talk to a biologist.  Trying to get arguments started over it on a Christian forum isn't exactly brave.  When I started to leave Christianity I didn't try to debate new Christians or every day folks I talked to Pastors.  People who really knew the topic well and would be a good test to see if I really considered all the relevant angles.  

Also your depiction of science and it's use seems a bit odd.  Based on the way you talk we would need to chuck out forensic science all together all because we don't have time machines with make/model/serial numbers.   Black holes can't be reproduced in a lab or test tube but there's sound reason to believe they exist.  I used to want to debate years ago too and then I realized the value in sincere dialogue and trying to understand someone else's view.  You might want to try it some time.

[post]

On 5/14/2016 at 9:09 PM, Bonky said:

I used to want to debate years ago too and then I realized the value in sincere dialogue

it takes some people a long time to realize that those aren't the same things.
& it's a rebuke to us that a non-believer has to be the one to point it out.

thanks, Bonky 




you can liken the difference to the radical message of Jesus Christ -- how He came to a people who had been given a law to abide by, that if they would follow, carried the promise with it of righteousness and eternal life. these people missed the point however; they were very eager to follow this, but they were made 'blind' so that they missed the fundamental basis that the law was built on: loving God and loving their neighbor. instead of keeping the basis of this law in their hearts, they became absorbed with the concept of "law" and added hundreds of quibbling details and strictures. instead of loving their brothers, they judged them - because although they had knowledge, and something that 'appeared' to be rightness, their knowledge was not knowledge that leads to life, and their rightness was human righteousness, not eternal righteousness. they missed the value in sincere dialogue with others, because they were always focused on how others were following all the little rules they had made up ((rules that God had never given them)) instead of following the rules God had given them, the primary one being to express love. 
enter Jesus: He treated these men very harshly, because they occupied positions of authority and not only destroyed themselves with their wrong behavior, but by teaching others, were leading a whole generation to hell. Jesus revealed the clear intention of the law - which wasn't given to judge each other, but to apply inwardly to one's self. He showed them the basis of the law, and how it should have taught them mercy, compassion and forgiveness -- things they should have learned because if they had understood the law inwardly, they would have seen that they could not keep it themselves, so they needed mercy from God. and they should have understood that the primary law was to love: to show mercy, not condemnation, to others. to have sincere dialogue, not debate. 

Jesus showed them with many simple examples how their focus was completely wicked. the third miracle He performed was healing a man on the sabbath day who had been invalid for 38 years, who lay near a pool hoping to be healed all that time. Jesus didn't ask him about if he believed, or tell him who He was, or anything - he just went up to him and asked if he would like to be healed? the man said he didn't have anyone to carry him to the pool ((which he believed was stirred up by an angel sometimes, and the first one to enter after it was stirred up would be healed)). the man wasn't thinking about God; he was thinking about magic. Jesus didn't correct him -- He just told him to pick up his mat and walk, and immediately he was healed. now, the pharisees would have recognized this man. he had been there laying by the pool for decades. any one of them could have ((following the intent of the law)) helped the man. instead what do you think they did? they ignored him, judging him by their laws - their narrow 'debate rules' of interaction with others. this was on the sabbath day, and they had a law saying that a man could not carry anything for any reason that day. it seemed like a good idea for a law - it was purportedly to honor God. but Jesus exposed them for what they were with this simple act: when they saw the man healed, made whole miraculously and carrying his mat around as Jesus had told him to do, they condemned him and told him he was breaking the law. no 'holy %#$ he's healed! what happened?? praise God!' -- just 'YOU ARE BREAKING THE LAW' -- and they hated this man for it, and hated Jesus for it.

no love. just hate.

no mercy. just condemnation.
no sincere dialogue. just debate. 
no love. just laws. misunderstood laws. misapplied laws. 
no righteousness. just an appearance of it. 

no knowledge of the truth: just knowledge of a procedure. 

 

so Christ came and taught us not to judge, or we would also be judged. He showed us that we should first love one another, and love mercy and express it, the same way that mercy has been expressed to us. He taught us to engage in sincere dialogue, not debate. 

Bonky, you probably know exactly the difference i'm trying to describe -- and perhaps it's the reason why you're a non-believer. the world sees Christianity as a judgmental group of people, condemning and hating others for their sin -- a group of people who for example only want to debate a homosexual, so they can prove to them that they are going to hell and everything they think is wrong. that only start conversations with them because they have this subtext of wanting to 'win an argument' -- not because they really want to talk to them. a group of people that, like you're saying, want to have debates, not real sincere dialogues. 
and you're right; the world's right -- about a whole lot of people in 'organized christianity.' we have 'pharisees' today just as much as there were when Jesus came a couple thousand years ago: nothing new under the sun. these are not 'real Christians' -- the Bible tells us that there will be more and more of such people in the 'church' towards the end. people who are missing the forest for the trees; who are way more concerned with all their niggling little rules, rules that God never gave them, than they are with following the simple few rules that God did give them: primarily to love God, to love one another. to love mercy, look for it from God, and express it to others. God is saying: have sincere dialogue, not debates. don't approach people just because you want to beat them over the head with an argument. 
and maybe this is why you're not a believer -- maybe this is the 'false christianity' that you've encountered, and never really seen the real thing. but Jesus found the real thing when He was here: in very unlikely places, and also in a few places where you would have expected to find it. there were some good men among the pharisees too. the difference was what was in their hearts, and that difference came out in their speech. compare how Nicodemus ((also a pharisee)) talked to Jesus (John 3) with all the examples of Jesus arguing with the ones trying to trip him up. Nicodemus came for sincere dialogue; the others came with sneaky plans to make Him look foolish, so they could say "aha!" and "win" the conversation. 
 

conversations are not things that can be "won" -- if that's what you're trying to do when you talk to someone; you're not really talking to that person at all; you're talking at them. 

the pharisees ((most of them)) didn't talk to Jesus because they wanted to learn from Him or because they actually wanted to know the answers to the questions they asked. they weren't looking for dialogue - they stayed up all night thinking of carefully framed debate questions with rigged 'rules' to ask Him - trying to trap Him with His answers. whenever He spoke, they missed what He was saying, because all they could think about was 'winning' some imaginary debate they made up in their minds. they acted like they had knowledge and were after it, but they were liars - they didn't have knowledge, and they rejected knowledge when He gave it to them; they only thing they cared about was their debate and 'winning it' because they acted out of vanity and hate. they were not sincere; they put up a false front. He called such people "whitewashed tombs" clean on the outside, but inside full of putrid decay. 

so Bonky -- i wrote all this to you because you are right, and what you said is very close to what the gospel of Jesus Christ is. i'm afraid you may not even know that, and afraid that's why you don't believe, because it's rare to find real Christians who show the real gospel of Jesus Christ. it is God not having a 'debate' with mankind; it is God instead having a sincere dialogue. "come now, let us reason together - though your sins be as scarlet, I will make them white as snow." He says. 
i want you to know, that there is a real Christianity --  that thing that your soul thirsts for, it exists. don't give up and hate religion because what you find when you look for it is pharisees and debate instead of Jesus and dialogue. keep looking, and believe. Love is real. i bet you're disgusted by a lot of what you see under the name 'christian' -- and i am too, and i really think so is God. but the real Jesus isn't condemning you; we're all already condemned and He's trying to reach out to you to forgive you and embrace you. the real God isn't trying to destroy you in a supernatural debate. the real God is looking for you to hold real, sincere dialogue with your soul. ♥



 

[Enoch2021]

On 5/14/2016 at 8:09 PM, Bonky said:

Enoch, if you really want to debate someone about the theory of evolution then talk to a biologist.  

That would be below my pay-grade.

 

Quote

Trying to get arguments started over it on a Christian forum isn't exactly brave.

1.  I'm not starting Arguments, I just asked a simple question.

2.  This is a "SCIENCE" and Faith Forum.

3.  I partake in many forums. 

 

Quote

When I started to leave Christianity...

Christianity... being a Christian, is about having a Personal Relationship with Jesus Christ.  

Leaving Christianity is tantamount to heading down to the Courthouse to file Divorce Papers against your Wife on the grounds that she "Doesn't EXIST"!

 

Quote

Also your depiction of science and it's use seems a bit odd.

Really??  The Scientific Method is "a bit odd" to you ?   Actually, that's not surprising.

 

Quote

Based on the way you talk we would need to chuck out forensic science all together all because we don't have time machines with make/model/serial numbers.

"Forensics Science" is a Married Bachelor !...

To be Science....you MUST follow it's Method; The Scientific Method:

Step 1: Observe a Phenomenon
Step 2: Lit Review
Step 3: Hypothesis
Step 4: TEST/EXPERIMENT
Step 5: Analyze Data
Step 6: Valid/Invalid Hypothesis
Step 7: Report Results

"Science is nothing more than a method of inquiry."
Crichton, Michael; Testimony before the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (28 September 2005)

1. Step 1 is NOT: Observe "Nouns" derivative of some Past Phenomenon. Then make "Guesses" (no matter how elaborate and technical) concerning Causation. 

2. To formulate VALID Formal Scientific Hypotheses you MUST have VIABLE "Independent Variables".

Independent Variables are what "Scientists Control" to TEST the Effects... Dependent Variables. So Independent Variables are The Proposed "CAUSE" the Dependent Variables are the "EFFECT". 
Science is in the Business of establishing "Cause and Effect" relationships via rigorous Hypothesis Testing. See how it all ties in?

So for "Forensics" to be Science, you must show:

1. Independent Variables of Past Events (That includes posting the: Make, Model, and Serial # of the Time Machine used) 

and/or

2. Show how you can have Science....without Scientific Hypotheses.   Go ahead....? 


Just because Universities (and Popular TV Shows) slap "Science" on the end of something 'Incoherently', doesn't make it so.

Also...just because something isn't "Science" doesn't Ipso Facto make it FALSE or not worth doing. You just Lose: Validity/Reliability/Precision/Accuracy.

That's why you get Thousands of people Exonerated that have be found guilty using Forensics..."False Positives!!"

"False Positives" are the Death Knell to any Scientific Hypothesis. 

There are other Methods employed to get @ TRUTH: Established VALID Scientific Laws and Principles combined with Logic is a pretty powerful combination.

 

Quote

Black holes can't be reproduced in a lab or test tube but there's sound reason to believe they exist.

Actually there's not and we don't "BELIEVE" in Science we.... "HYPOTHESIS TEST"...

Black Holes, eh? Black Holes were conjured by matheMagics from Einstein's Field Equations. 

'Black Holes were first discovered as purely mathematical solutions of Einstein's field equations. This solution, the Schwarzschild black hole, is a nonlinear solution of the Einstein equations of general Relativity. It contains no matter, and exists forever in an asymptotically flat space-time."
Dictionary of Geophysics, Astrophysics, and Astronomy, pg 55....

"It contains no matter" oh my, come again? "and exists forever"....in the Imagination.

Translation: Fairytale

Can you show us one? If you can't show one, can you please @ least show ONE Solution to ANY of Einstein's Field Equations for 2 or more masses?
I'll save you some time.... it doesn't exist!
Don't you have to have 2 Masses for Gravity?

 

And what is "gravity"....?  What is it's Cause...?

 

Quote

 I used to want to debate years ago too and then I realized the value in sincere dialogue and trying to understand someone else's view.

I do understand their points of view.  Most are like yours, Pseudo-Science.  The I EXPOSE THEM, like here.

 

 

regards

[Ezra]

On 5/6/2016 at 6:44 PM, Enoch2021 said:

We are told that 'evolution' is the most validated 'theory' in the history of science for ever and ever and ever.  

The theory of evolution is an unproven hypothesis, and even Darwin himself admitted in his book On the Origin of Species, that there were several very serious obstacles to what he was proposing: That many and grave objections may be advanced against the theory of descent with modification through natural selection, I do not deny.

[Enoch2021]

7 hours ago, Ezra said:

The theory of evolution is an unproven hypothesis, and even Darwin himself admitted in his book On the Origin of Species, that there were several very serious obstacles to what he was proposing:

It's not and never was even a Scientific Hypothesis....he never ever performed a Single Experiment.  

Crocheting is more "Scientific"!!

 

Quote

That many and grave objections may be advanced against the theory of descent with modification through natural selection, I do not deny.

Theory ??   Oy Vey.  This guy says "Theory" and well... it must be a Scientific Theory then. 

He and everyone else associated with the mind-numbing Fairytale is using the term "theory" colloquially --- "Unbridled Speculation" = theory, in place of an ACTUAL Scientific Theory --- Validated/Confirmed Hypotheses.

 

Is this a Giraffe...

??

regards

 

[SavedOnebyGrace]

On Saturday, May 07, 2016 at 8:23 AM, Kan said:

Post asked Enoch why he started this thread, with the intention, I guess, to finding out what he wanted to accomplish by it. Enoch takes it personally, which he did not have to. That is what I am saying. He could have continued on an academic level without feeling that he had to divulge a personal motive for starting the thread.

In any case, I think there's a little too much tension in the way Enoch writes, and I'm not sure whether it's a cultural thing or just a personal style. Not that it is a worry, but the topics hardly make it past the start line...before Enoch is hitting someone hard with a corrector pen, if you know what I mean.  Can't help liking the guy though.

I don't have any problem not liking the guy, but that's just me.

[SavedOnebyGrace]

On Saturday, May 07, 2016 at 2:05 PM, kwikphilly said:

Blessings Rusty,,,,,,

 

Sheesh Sis,,,,beats me,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is the same thing over & over on every thread,,,,,,,Enoch asks or answers questions,he is accused constantly of "being insulting",taking it personal","having ulterior motives","contempt for Scripture" & a host of other insults and yet he is the "bad guy",,,it is actually laughable,,,,,,,,,I was wondering if perhaps it was only a little head butting & differing personalities until I too was personally attacked ,unprovoked????????? So ,you got me,,,,,I have no idea what is going on here,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

   Yes,Enoch is often mis-understood ,he has a unique sense of humor & a quick wit,,,,,,,,,,,unfortunately for some,his scientific knowledge is extensive ,surpassing most,,,,,,& fortunately,he has a heart of gold ,could care less about sarcasm & loves us all even if we are jerks at times,,,,,,,Praise be to Jesus!                                                                                         Love-Kwik

BTW,Kan,,,,,not talking about you,you have always been very kind & respectful to me,,,,,,,

I know enoch2021 is your friend, but I've personally had enough of his attitude.  But that's just me.  Blessings to you kwik.