It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I am curious why you seem to be so obsessed that one human thinks evolution is fact. There are lots of people that think theories are fact, even some scientists. I say let people think what they want to think unless you can prove evolution of fish to amphibian is not at all possible.
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: edmc^2
originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: edmc^2
Believe is only something for things you can't know. Like you have to believe in a creator because there is no evidence so it's the opposite of knowing.
There is plenty of evidence for evolution so I don't have to believe because I know.
I can repeat myself endlessly it's not difficult at all.
Ok, let's go deeper.
If you know evolution is a fact why is it then a theory?
And are the evidence really based on facts or just an interpretation?
For example, since there's no clear evidence of a fish gradually turning into an amphibian, how do you know it happened?
originally posted by: MRinder
I am curious why you seem to be so obsessed that one human thinks evolution is fact. There are lots of people that think theories are fact, even some scientists. I say let people think what they want to think unless you can prove evolution of fish to amphibian is not at all possible.
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: edmc^2
originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: edmc^2
Believe is only something for things you can't know. Like you have to believe in a creator because there is no evidence so it's the opposite of knowing.
There is plenty of evidence for evolution so I don't have to believe because I know.
I can repeat myself endlessly it's not difficult at all.
Ok, let's go deeper.
If you know evolution is a fact why is it then a theory?
And are the evidence really based on facts or just an interpretation?
For example, since there's no clear evidence of a fish gradually turning into an amphibian, how do you know it happened?
originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: edmc^2
Look I am no biologist, I could go on about lungfish and certain fins developing into limbs where we got records of, but to me that's not really the point,
because
if the alternative is a creator, of which there are zero fossil records, it's just not a question at all.
Billions of fossiles, observed evolution in every living thing from virus to elephant
vs
a fairy tale
It's absurd to even compare creation with evolution.
Because
Plenty of evidence (evolution)
vs
ZERO (creation)
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: YouSir
originally posted by: edmc^2
Why Most Evolutionists Don’t BELIEVE in Evolution?
Perplexing question or is it a play on the word? Or is it true? A conundrum perhaps?
What say you?
For my part, I believe they don’t. BUT I also believe they think it as fact.
And to them, I believe, to think that it is a fact is more than enough, because to admit that they do, i.e. believe in it, is tantamount to having faith. And that’s a taboo. It’s like believing in evolution is an act of “faith” (as though it is not).
But why does this matter?
It matters for the fact that it shows the depth of one’s conviction on the matter. Hence on this fact, they are not really fully convinced of its truthfulness but just think of it as such.
But let’s put it to the test.
Do you (evolutionists) BELIEVE in evolution?
Are you uncomfortable with that word, if so, what word or vocabulary do you want to use to define your “belief” in evolution?
Proponents of creation, what say you?
Any ideas why they are so scared of the word BELIEVE when it comes to evolution?
Ummm...perhaps the word your looking for is gnosis...science has knowledge pertaining to theory...yet can't claim fact as truth and remain scientific...
It's no different than a skeptical approach to conspiracy...
None of us on this site can claim truth and fact regarding any of the myriad considerations communicated as OP or response to OP...
We merely parrot opinion and foist perspective as fact...
None of us really know if any truth resides in any form of media we choose to opine about...
It sure is fun speculating here daily though...
YouSir
Sure, gnosis, but that word deals more in the spiritual matters. Not physical, as in biological evolution.
gno·sis
[ˈnōsəs]
NOUN
knowledge of spiritual mysteries.
Gnosis (-g·no·sis): From Greek γνῶσις. Knowledge.
originally posted by: YouSir
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: YouSir
originally posted by: edmc^2
Why Most Evolutionists Don’t BELIEVE in Evolution?
Perplexing question or is it a play on the word? Or is it true? A conundrum perhaps?
What say you?
For my part, I believe they don’t. BUT I also believe they think it as fact.
And to them, I believe, to think that it is a fact is more than enough, because to admit that they do, i.e. believe in it, is tantamount to having faith. And that’s a taboo. It’s like believing in evolution is an act of “faith” (as though it is not).
But why does this matter?
It matters for the fact that it shows the depth of one’s conviction on the matter. Hence on this fact, they are not really fully convinced of its truthfulness but just think of it as such.
But let’s put it to the test.
Do you (evolutionists) BELIEVE in evolution?
Are you uncomfortable with that word, if so, what word or vocabulary do you want to use to define your “belief” in evolution?
Proponents of creation, what say you?
Any ideas why they are so scared of the word BELIEVE when it comes to evolution?
Ummm...perhaps the word your looking for is gnosis...science has knowledge pertaining to theory...yet can't claim fact as truth and remain scientific...
It's no different than a skeptical approach to conspiracy...
None of us on this site can claim truth and fact regarding any of the myriad considerations communicated as OP or response to OP...
We merely parrot opinion and foist perspective as fact...
None of us really know if any truth resides in any form of media we choose to opine about...
It sure is fun speculating here daily though...
YouSir
Sure, gnosis, but that word deals more in the spiritual matters. Not physical, as in biological evolution.
gno·sis
[ˈnōsəs]
NOUN
knowledge of spiritual mysteries.
Ummm...actually...I was using the original Greek definition of gnosis
Gnosis (-g·no·sis): From Greek γνῶσις. Knowledge.
YouSir
originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: edmc^2
Oh so if just the word "theory" is a problem for you no problem it means:
A scheme or system of ideas or statements held as an account or explanation of a group of facts or phenomena; a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment and is accepted as accounting for the known facts.
That's what the word theory in science means.
There are plenty:
Information theory
Game theory
Oxygen theory of combustion
Quantum theory
...
originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: edmc^2
Interpretation of evidence is not the same as belief. It's a conclusion. Big difference
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: edmc^2
Oh so if just the word "theory" is a problem for you no problem it means:
A scheme or system of ideas or statements held as an account or explanation of a group of facts or phenomena; a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment and is accepted as accounting for the known facts.
That's what the word theory in science means.
There are plenty:
Information theory
Game theory
Oxygen theory of combustion
Quantum theory
...
No, it's not a problem. My point is, theory can be interpreted in many ways - until it is confirmed to be factual. Then it becomes a fact.
Hence evolution theory is based on interpretation.
How you interpret the data is dependent on what you believe is a fact. You pursue that belief until proven to be a fact.
originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: edmc^2
Oh so if just the word "theory" is a problem for you no problem it means:
A scheme or system of ideas or statements held as an account or explanation of a group of facts or phenomena; a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment and is accepted as accounting for the known facts.
That's what the word theory in science means.
There are plenty:
Information theory
Game theory
Oxygen theory of combustion
Quantum theory
...
originally posted by: Peeple
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: edmc^2
Oh so if just the word "theory" is a problem for you no problem it means:
A scheme or system of ideas or statements held as an account or explanation of a group of facts or phenomena; a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment and is accepted as accounting for the known facts.
That's what the word theory in science means.
There are plenty:
Information theory
Game theory
Oxygen theory of combustion
Quantum theory
...
No, it's not a problem. My point is, theory can be interpreted in many ways - until it is confirmed to be factual. Then it becomes a fact.
Hence evolution theory is based on interpretation.
How you interpret the data is dependent on what you believe is a fact. You pursue that belief until proven to be a fact.
Did you even read what I wrote?
originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: edmc^2
The fossil records still exist, that's why they're called "record"
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: YouSir
originally posted by: edmc^2
originally posted by: YouSir
originally posted by: edmc^2
Why Most Evolutionists Don’t BELIEVE in Evolution?
Perplexing question or is it a play on the word? Or is it true? A conundrum perhaps?
What say you?
For my part, I believe they don’t. BUT I also believe they think it as fact.
And to them, I believe, to think that it is a fact is more than enough, because to admit that they do, i.e. believe in it, is tantamount to having faith. And that’s a taboo. It’s like believing in evolution is an act of “faith” (as though it is not).
But why does this matter?
It matters for the fact that it shows the depth of one’s conviction on the matter. Hence on this fact, they are not really fully convinced of its truthfulness but just think of it as such.
But let’s put it to the test.
Do you (evolutionists) BELIEVE in evolution?
Are you uncomfortable with that word, if so, what word or vocabulary do you want to use to define your “belief” in evolution?
Proponents of creation, what say you?
Any ideas why they are so scared of the word BELIEVE when it comes to evolution?
Ummm...perhaps the word your looking for is gnosis...science has knowledge pertaining to theory...yet can't claim fact as truth and remain scientific...
It's no different than a skeptical approach to conspiracy...
None of us on this site can claim truth and fact regarding any of the myriad considerations communicated as OP or response to OP...
We merely parrot opinion and foist perspective as fact...
None of us really know if any truth resides in any form of media we choose to opine about...
It sure is fun speculating here daily though...
YouSir
Sure, gnosis, but that word deals more in the spiritual matters. Not physical, as in biological evolution.
gno·sis
[ˈnōsəs]
NOUN
knowledge of spiritual mysteries.
Ummm...actually...I was using the original Greek definition of gnosis
Gnosis (-g·no·sis): From Greek γνῶσις. Knowledge.
YouSir
Ok, if you say so. But what comes after knowing?
Is that the end of it?
One can know something but it's totally a different matter to believe it.