Rick Perry the creationist, theory of evolution has cracks in it and is "out there" (2011, versus)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And before you start your typical hate replies, I'm agnostic, therefore I dont believe in creationism, but that doesnt mean evolution isnt a theory as well.
My 10 year old son could tell you its a theory, you dont know that?
In common usage, the word theory is often used to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. This usage of theory leads to the common incorrect statement “It’s not a fact, it’s only a theory.” True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them. In this usage, the word is synonymous with hypothesis.
In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of naturalphenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists “theory” and “fact” do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behavior are Newton’s theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and general relativity.
The defining characteristic of a scientific theory is that it makes falsifiable or testable predictions about things not yet observed. The relevance, and specificity of those predictions determine how (potentially) useful the theory is. A would-be theory which makes no predictions which can be observed is not a useful theory. Predictions which are not sufficiently specific to be tested are similarly not useful. In both cases, the term ‘theory’ is inapplicable.
Always disingenuous. Do you honestly believe he doesn't believe one to be the truth? I'm sure when he held his prayer rally that he asked god to provide him with a final answer...
In common usage, the word theory is often used to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. This usage of theory leads to the common incorrect statement “It’s not a fact, it’s only a theory.” True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them. In this usage, the word is synonymous with hypothesis.
In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of naturalphenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists “theory” and “fact” do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behavior are Newton’s theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and general relativity.
The defining characteristic of a scientific theory is that it makes falsifiable or testable predictions about things not yet observed. The relevance, and specificity of those predictions determine how (potentially) useful the theory is. A would-be theory which makes no predictions which can be observed is not a useful theory. Predictions which are not sufficiently specific to be tested are similarly not useful. In both cases, the term ‘theory’ is inapplicable.
None of this means Perry was wrong. Evolution IS a theory and has been viewed as one for over 100 years. Right off the bat I seen the errors in the OP because they are ridiculing Perry for saying that evolution is a theory and has cracks in it.. Which is is on both counts.
Always disingenuous. Do you honestly believe he doesn't believe one to be the truth? I'm sure when he held his prayer rally that he asked god to provide him with a final answer...
I dont particularly care if he believes the theory in creationist, it doesnt matter, nor should he be criticizied for it. They are called THEORIES for a reason.
Tell me SLCPUNK, why do you hate people who are religious so much? For being a liberal, you seem to be very intolerant of others with different viewpoints.
None of this means Perry was wrong. Evolution IS a theory and has been viewed as one for over 100 years. Right off the bat I seen the errors in the OP because they are ridiculing Perry for saying that evolution is a theory and has cracks in it.. Which is is on both counts.
Your playing semantics. Perry mentioned evolution being a theory with cracks in it during a discussion of creationism versus evolution.
Anyone with a half a brain knows what he was saying. Why didn't he state that creationism is a theory full of holes?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
