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.
That's just philosophy for itself, Pan Terra; and progress is by realism. I think, realism is done. And instead the science is to be discussed for philosophy of natural science and ho the validation of rigorous scientific noumenological structures... give morality for a religious existence. That is my schooling memory. The universals of evolutionary ideas are because of science and not logical structure. It's the particular events which are randomly composed.
Last edited by tgnostic; 12-22-2011 at 04:09 PM..
Reason: syntax
You can't call evolution a fact, it goes against the Scientific Method, because it isn't 100% proveable, BUT, it is widely accepted that that is how things went and also what I agree with too, but you cannot call it a fact. Just technicalities I suppose, but still..
The fact that you clearly fail to understand the difference between the theory of evolution -- the proposed mechanism of evolution -- and the fact of evolution -- the observed change of heritable traits in a gene pool over generations -- demonstrates that you really haven't the foggiest idea what the word 'evolution' means.
It's like gravity. Is it a theory? Yes, there is a theory of gravity, describing the attraction exerted by objects with mass. There is also the fact of gravity, the phenomenon of massive objects exerting an attractive force, which can be observed and measured. Two concepts, related, one a fact and one a theory. Thus it is with evolution.
As a person in the science field, it is quite annoying here, because Evolution IS a theory. For something to be a theory, it has to have a LOT of scientific evidence.
There is no scientist who will ever call evolution a fact.
I thought evolution was a theory based on accumulated scientific facts , a theory that can change as new facts emerge..
Read Voyageur's link. I just did.
But for those who will not:
Evolution has occurred. Man has arisen from a predecessor that was not man. Dogs have arisen from predecessors that were not dogs. Etc.
This is a fact.
The theory of evolution explains how these facts came to be. The broad brushstrokes of evolution are not under dispute. Scientists are working on the smaller component bits of evolutionary theory.
That's just philosophy for itself, Pan Terra; and progress is by realism. I think, realism is done. And instead the science is to be discussed for philosophy of natural science and ho the validation of rigorous scientific noumenological structures... give morality for a religious existence. That is my schooling memory. The universals of evolutionary ideas are because of science and not logical structure. It's the particular events which are randomly composed.
\
What the...? Evidently you cannot follow the context of my comment. Go back, look what I was referring to in the context of the conversation and try again. Thanks for playing.
You'll have to focus, Pan Terra, somewhere else for socio-political philosophy. Empirical observation -- maybe you mean.
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.
