Subject:
|
Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 31 Jan 2001 04:18:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
406 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Franks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Steve Chapple writes:
> > If I say "The fossil record does not support evolution" and you say
> > "Yes it does." - that isn't a refutation. I'm expecting you to attempt
> > to provide evidence to show how a fossil of a cat and a fossil of a dog
> > someone "prove" that one evolved into the other.
>
> It's like asking a Christian to prove whether Jesus was white or black, there
> is no way to "prove" it either way. We are forced to use what evidence and
> logic we have at our disposal to come up with the most probable answer.
>
> On the other hand - the statement "the fossil record does not disprove
> evolution", is compatible with the belief that "the fossil record does not
> prove evolution".
>
>
> > I've seen/read plenty of theory - I've yet to see any solid evidence.
>
> I don't think we'll find "solid evidence", it's a matter of faith :-)
I just do not see it that way, except to the level of having faith in the
basic evidence of one's senses, in the chain of verifiabillty (I am
reasonably certain that Brazil exists based on verifiability), and in the
prowess of logic.
No theory is ever "proven" by evidence. Just substantiated. Theories can be
DISproven, if evidence is produced that contradicts an assumption or
prediction, but not proven.
So Steve is asking for something that can't be given. NOTHING can prove
evolution. But evolution is the best explanation of the observations, it is
supported by all sorts of things, and it is a great predictor.
Creation is a terribly implausible explanation of the observations, it is a
terrible predictor of things, and it isn't supported by much of anything
unless you go down the sophist rabbithole of saying that god set up the
evidence to point to evolution just to be pernicious with his playthings.
Asking that someone PROVE evolution shows a basic failure to grasp the
scientific method. Which the creationists here have amply demonstrated,
uncritical thinkers one and all.
++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
| Hi, (...) If you think of the number of animals that have existed over the previous X million years, and the small fraction of these whose remains have survived to exist as fossils, and the smaller fraction of these which actually have been found (...) (24 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
95 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
