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.
He did not suggest that you are gay. It seems like you selectively read a small part of a sentence and immediately responded. I think this post is a good sample of why this discussion has become so difficult for you. You should consider slowing down and actually reading entire sentences at a time. Go over each sentence 2 or 3 times if that helps you understand it better. I think we've identified the root of the problem.
I think it might be the 6th or 7th time now that I have reposted this? I don't know how you could possibly keep missing it.
Just to clarify: A Scientific Theory is a "well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations. It ties together all the facts about something, providing an explanation that fits all the observations and can be used to make predictions."
The scientific Theory of Evolution is the best explanation for all the observable evidence from the fossil records, from comparative anatomy, and from DNA analysis. The Theory is also consistent with other fields of science. The Theory fits all the observations of genetic changes in populations and diversity of life on earth. It ties together all the facts, and it's predictions remain true.
As a scientific theory, the Theory of Evolution could be falsified by evidence that contradicts the Theory. So far, in more than 150 years, that has not happened.
Great - so explain why you believe that there is observable evidence for evolution, which is the question that you have been avoiding for the last two days.
While you are at it, please provide your definition of evolution.
Where are the observable facts in the theory of evolution?
There are observable facts as far as they go. As I tried to discuss earlier there has to be adaptation for their to be evolution. Survival of the fittest and all. We can observe this over time. Adaptation doesn't prove evolution as far as the creation of us goes though. It's a theory. One neither proven or disproven.
I don't know why it's so difficult for so many to say "I do not know" because we simply don't for so many questions.
Fair enough. Sorry, too many people on this thread have misused the term "theory" and don't understand what a Scientific Theory is.
This would apply to you, since you refuse to answer the simple question "why do you believe that there is observable evidence for the theory of evolution".
One of the most recent studies resulting in observable evidence that support the scientific theory of evolution is likely in relation to E.Coli studies. The study involved 50,000 generations of E.coli.
One of the most recent studies resulting in observable evidence that support the scientific theory of evolution is likely in relation to E.Coli studies. The study involved 50,000 generations of E.coli.
That in the end are all still E.Coli. The study doesn't really do much outside of enforce what we have known for years.
One of the most recent studies resulting in observable evidence that support the scientific theory of evolution is likely in relation to E.Coli studies. The study involved 50,000 generations of E.coli.
I posted a link to Lenski's study early in the thread here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceist
Demanding little munchkin...
I want to see you prove you've read all the information in the links I provided.
Especially this one:
Richard Lenski's 25 year experiment: 59,331.4 generations of e. coli evolution and counting.
Of course it was completely ignored by the resident Creationists, YECers and anti-science conspiracy nutters who seem to have either the memory of a gnat or a propensity for reading threads with their eyes closed.
There are observable facts as far as they go. As I tried to discuss earlier there has to be adaptation for their to be evolution. Survival of the fittest and all. We can observe this over time. Adaptation doesn't prove evolution as far as the creation of us goes though. It's a theory. One neither proven or disproven.
The reality of natural selection does not equate to evolution as evolutionists claim.
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.
