Agnostic.com

1 0

This my reply to Flyingsaucesir with regards to Darwin theory is settled science
I charge $130 per hour so your advise would be meaning less and it actually is meaning less. I am so happy i never took any of your tutoring class as i would failed every thing. science is never settled historically and philosophically, this statement is unsustainable.
Darwin's theory has so fucking many holes in where do begin.
The Theory of Evolution will never become a law of science because it is wrought with errors. This is why it is still called a theory, instead of a law. The process of natural selection is not an evolutionary process. theory is just that a theory you seem to think you will convince me that the word theory as in Darwin's theory is Fact. wakey wakey Flyingsaucesir
a theory can be -conjecture

  • a guess
  • hypothesis
    I don't know what fucking school you were going too but, if they are teaching you biology and Darwin as your grand puba they were indoctrinating you in to stupidity
  • If natural selection were true, Eskimos would have fur to keep warm
  • humans in the tropics would have silver, reflective skin to help them keep cool, But they don't they have black skin, just the opposite of what the theory of natural selection would predict.
    His famous book, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, has a title that is now known to be scientifically false. so instead piss all over me with this bullshit that hasn't been settled like you think. why don't you look into the facts of climate change you will find the IPCC of which is another creation of the corporation that want you to believe man is destroying the earth....I am destroying the earth, are you, what just be cause we exist....we never need catalytic converters on vehicles. yes they did help clean the cities up... the biggest thing they did in the 1970 was unleaded fuel of which was very good for whole planet.

    @1patriot How can Darwin's theory be classified as settled science?

I usually charge $75/hour for tutoring, but for you, today, I will make an exception.

Let's start at the beginning.

A conjecture is basically a guess about the nature of something that is unknown or not well understood. There may not be any good way to test a conjecture.

A hypothesis is an educated guess, one that can be tested.

After rigorous and repeated testing, if the results consistently indicate that the hypothesis is correct, then what we learned from the process may be called a fact.

A theory is an explanation that unifies and makes sense of a set of facts that otherwise may appear unrelated. This unifying explanation opens up entirely new avenues of inquiry. One of the hallmarks of a correct theory is that it allows us to successfully predict future discoveries.

Example:

It is a fact that the east coasts of the Americas look as if they fit, like jigsaw puzzle pieces, with the west coasts of Africa and Europe.

It is a fact that the Pacific Ocean is ringed by volcanoes.

It is a fact that all the world's oceans have mid-ocean volcanic ridges.

It is a fact that ocean bottom rocks are youngest at the ridges and are progressively older the farther away they are from the mid-ocean ridge.

It is a fact that ocean bottom rocks plunge underneath continental rocks along steep fault planes.

It is a fact that the strongest earthquakes ever recorded occur along the faults between oceanic and continental rocks.

It is a fact that a major fault runs through California, and the motion along it is right-lateral strike-slip (not at all like the fault that plunges under the west coast of South America).

At first glance, it may appear that these facts are unrelated. In fact, they ARE related. And their relationships to each other is explained by a theory: the theory of plate tectonics.

This theory says that the Earth's crust is divided into distinct plates that constantly move around and jostle each other. The movement of the plates is driven by convection currents in the mantle, which are in turn driven by heat generated through the decay of radioactive elements in the rocks. Formulation of this theory opened up the field of geology, allowing a cascade of successful predictions about faults, volcanoes, stratigraphy, geophysical properties of rocks, etc., etc.

Review:

A theory is not to be confused with a conjecture or hypothesis.

A conjecture is a guess.

A hypothesis is an educated guess that can be tested.

A hypothesis that has been tested and found to be correct can be called a fact.

A theory is an explanation that unifies and makes sense of a disparate set of facts.

Conclusion:

Charles Darwin's theory of evolution is such a theory. It has proven to be so successful, that it is now considered the grand unifying theory of biology. The biologist Theodosius Dobzhansky famously said "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution."

1patriot 7 Sep 25
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

1 comment

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

2

The evolution of the eye is well understood. So your Darwin quote meme is once again a stupid sandwich.

In fact there's even another layer of stupid. This is what Darwin said after your cherry picked out of context quote: "... if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory."

duffuss post your peer review that it's accepted. i bet you were clapping yesterday when Canada's parliament give a standing ovation to a 98 year SS nazi you prick!

Right you are, @Druvius! In fact, eyes have evolved independently many times in many different lineages. In the lineage that led to mammals, it probably went something like this:

A simple flat patch of light-sensitive cells is better, more useful in survival and procreation than absence of such a patch. Any individuals having such an advantage were more likely to survive and reproduce than those who did not have it. And making the patch even slightly bowl-shaped is an improvement, allowing not only sensation of light but also the approximate direction from which the light in emanating. Further curvature increases the rudimentary eye's effectiveness at determining the source of the light (or an object casting a shadow by passing in front of it). Reducing the aperture to a pinhole can provide a clear but dim image; a rough blob of clear protein in a larger aperture can let in lots of light and also act as a lense. Smoothing of the lense over generations increases the visual acuity of descendants over that of their ancestors. Each successive adaptation gave individuals who possessed it an advantage for survival and reproduction over their contemporaries who lacked it. Isn't it amazing how, in time, natural selection acting on the natural variation in populations can produce such wonderfully useful structures? 😍

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:731959
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.