now this is trolling. stop. -MOriginally Posted by prunepicker
But while I wait, so that no one but you, for some crazy reason, can say I don't offer evidence.
When the Universe was twice as hot ? Starts With A Bang
What Is The Evidence For The Big Bang?
Harvard-led team detects gravitational waves, evidence of cosmic inflation - Science - The Boston Globe
That's just a couple through the ages.
You see, when a scientist makes observations, they then construct a model. If they find more evidence for the model, it gets better, maybe becomes a theory when it can be tested and verified. If evidence contradicts the model, they throw it out. That's called science. That's why about half the scientists were hoping they wouldn't find the Higgs Boson, because they'd get to dream about something new.
Sitting behind a computer screen denying the vast, overwhelming amount of data and evidence to support a scientific theory isn't science, that's religious dogma.
Crap, I just noticed that we are now 27 pages without evidence for creation. Anyone care to contribute any?
world view. Heck he won't even accept the evidence that shows him to
Why anyone one would say they depend upon science for evidence and deny
it in the same breath is beyond comprehension. In fact it's totally unscientific.
Not that chadnth has ever been scientific. I didn't mean to imply that.
and using every trick in the book? You and I both know that if you could
put up that you would. The reality is that you can't.
Yes, I've provided sufficient evidence. You, on the other hand, have provided
Awaiting your non answer in 3...2...1...
Take your time. We all know that you can't provide any evidence of your
indoctrinated and dogmatic beliefs. Hey, if you could you would.
I'll await for some real evidence. Not that I expect it from you. Not at all. You
and I both know that if you could provide unsubstantiated evidence that
you would. I commend you for the effort.
However, reality says that there is no substantiated evidence. None
But, and it's a big but, if you find it necessary to continue your quest I'm
going to sit back and watch you squirm. Science is so much fun and
especially when it's on my side. LOL.
Perhaps you'll come to your senses as the knight in his quest for El
Dorado had to do.
Space Ripples Reveal Big Bang’s Smoking Gun
This one has pictures - maybe it will help. Or maybe not.
One thing I notice is the real scientists always qualify their evidence and discoveries as still open to modification if and when new, actual evidence is discovered. Claiming to teach science is not the same nor does it require the same level of rigor and intellectual honesty.
This entire thread can be summed up by a statement Neil DeGrasse Tyson made at the end of Cosmos episode 2. Tyson proclaimed there is no shame in admitting you do not know something and that the real shame is pretending to know everything.
The truth is never embarrassed by honest enquiry.
Evidence for the Big Bang is overwhelming
BBC News - Cosmic inflation: 'Spectacular' discovery hailed
The truth is never embarrassed by honest enquiry.
I'll never understand why those who are intent upon science being the supreme
power disregard the fact that science doesn't have all of the answers.
In the meantime. This link hasn't been confirmed. In fact I mentioned
that a few threads back.
Apparently you and the others are fine without confirmed evidence.
I'm not. I'm all about scientific evidence.
Yawn. Oh, did somebody say something? Gee look at the time. Oh looky,
nothing new to consider. Nothing at all.
I'll check back next year and provide the same reply. Why? because this is
nothing new under the sun.
And we are still waiting for your evidence of creation. We've played this game for a long time, but it's important to occasionally expose creationism for the intellectual fraud that it is. It has no foundation in rational thought, nor evidence to support it. It's mythology, nothing more.
This isn't meant to be proof or evidence, but it's a feel-good clip where you get to see the sheer joy of a man whose life's work of trying to understand the beauty of the universe being validated.
Watch a Stanford Physicist Find Out He Was Right About the Big Bang
We may not be sure about the Big Bang but one thing we should all be able to agree on,
based on all the evidence from the last two hundred years, is the Earth and the universe is a lot older than 6000 years.
Is there anyone on this board still willing to cling to a young earth theory? Prune or Garin or anyone?
It is possible to be a creationist, I guess, and still accept the age of the universe is in the billions or at least in the millions in age.
It is also possible to be a creationist, I guess, and figure mankind has been around for 100,000 to 200,000 years.
Evolution may not an observable theory just as creation is not observable but there a lot more clues pointing to an old earth
and species changing and evolving over long periods of time. Asking that you find a fossil that shows a specie in the process
of evolving into another specie is just... how shall I say it... STUPID!
There's enough evidence of apes and chimps processing through Rhodesian, Neanderthal, Cro-Magnon to humans whether you
use dna or whether you use paleontological science to make the case. Asking that you find a cave where you find the fossils
of two highly intelligent cro-magnons and their newborn baby Adam is off the charts silly.
I'd like to know from Prune and Garin 1) how old they think the earth is and 2) how old they think the universe is?
ridiculous is the notion that we're supposed to blindly accept the
idea that they evolved, take mankind f'rinstance, from each. There's no
supporting evidence of this happening and if it did the evidence would be
overwhelming according to Darwin.
To expect to see evidence of one species becoming another species via the
fossil record isn't stupid. It's a thorn in the side of evolutionists.
Evolution does exist and it is observable. In fact evolution is the observation.
Don't hassle me, I'm local.
The secondary contact phase of allopatric speciation in Darwin's finches
Speciation, the process by which two species form from one, involves the development of reproductive isolation of two divergent lineages. Here, we report the establishment and persistence of a reproductively isolated population of Darwin's finches on the small Galápagos Island of Daphne Major in the secondary contact phase of speciation. In 1981, an immigrant medium ground finch (Geospiza fortis) arrived on the island. It was unusually large, especially in beak width, sang an unusual song, and carried some Geospiza scandens alleles. We followed the fate of this individual and its descendants for seven generations over a period of 28 years. In the fourth generation, after a severe drought, the lineage was reduced to a single brother and sister, who bred with each other. From then on this lineage, inheriting unusual song, morphology, and a uniquely homozygous marker allele, was reproductively isolated, because their own descendants bred with each other and with no other member of the resident G. fortis population. These observations agree with some expectations of an ecological theory of speciation in that a barrier to interbreeding arises as a correlated effect of adaptive divergence in morphology. However, the important, culturally transmitted, song component of the barrier appears to have arisen by chance through an initial imperfect copying of local song by the immigrant. The study reveals additional stochastic elements of speciation, in which divergence is initiated in allopatry; immigration to a new area of a single male hybrid and initial breeding with a rare hybrid female.
Peter and Rosemary Grant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Darwin's finches tracked to reveal evolution in action : Nature News
Just another example of someone witnessing evolution.
There you go with the evidence stuff again.....
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)