Halo 2 Forum > Off-topic > Debate Forum
 
 
Display Modes Thread Tools
E Nomini Patri
Level 21
E Nomini Patri's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 566
Subtract from E Nomini Patri's ReputationAdd to E Nomini Patri's Reputation E Nomini Patri is a novice
Send a message via MSN to E Nomini Patri
#301
05-31-2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TooMuchButtHair View Post
The burden of proof is on YOU to disprove scientific FACT. The burden is NOT on me to prove something you should have learned in the 8th grade. Evolution has been observed IN ACTION a TON.
I already know evolution, but you said it's been proven. You have to supply a proof that can demonstrate your claim, even though it severely deviates from the scientific method.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TooMuchButtHair View Post
Wait, what is to support? Do you even know what the scientific method is? Write it out on paper, and then you'll clearly be able to see just how/why a law must be a theory before it can actually be a law.
Yes I do. Perhaps you should name one law in biology as an example, which is impossible because natural law does not necessitate biological law. Quite the hump for you to clear I would think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TooMuchButtHair View Post
You're nuts! I didn't say they were the only theories that became laws, I just used them as two famous examples. I have no explaining to do at all. You just need to get an education instead of just listening to pundits.
You misread my post, I said they were only theories before they became facts. Not *the only* theories that became laws. Quantum mechanics and Relativity are still theories, they are not laws anyways. Must I explain to you that theories are cumulations of laws and facts? They can only be disproved or improved. You cannot tear down the pinnacle of the scientific method hierarchy.

Start over playa.


Livin in the ATX sonnnn...
Graphic Design Portfolio | GT: RVG E Nomini | Youtube Channel
TooMuchButtHair
Satisfying women
TooMuchButtHair's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California!
Posts: 3,659
Subtract from TooMuchButtHair's ReputationAdd to TooMuchButtHair's Reputation TooMuchButtHair is a novice
Send a message via AIM to TooMuchButtHair
#302
05-31-2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by E Nomini Patri View Post
I already know evolution, but you said it's been proven. You have to supply a proof that can demonstrate your claim, even though it severely deviates from the scientific method.



Yes I do. Perhaps you should name one law in biology as an example, which is impossible because natural law does not necessitate biological law. Quite the hump for you to clear I would think.



You misread my post, I said they were only theories before they became facts. Not *the only* theories that became laws. Quantum mechanics and Relativity are still theories, they are not laws anyways. Must I explain to you that theories are cumulations of laws and facts? They can only be disproved or improved. You cannot tear down the pinnacle of the scientific method hierarchy.

Start over playa.
Lol, I don't think so. Your trying to turn an arguement of semantics into disproof of evolution. It doesn't work that way.
The study of theology, as it stands in the Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authority; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion.
-Thomas Paine

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prowl View Post
. . .
Chimpanzee (our closest living relative) is a well known homosexual animal.. . .
E Nomini Patri
Level 21
E Nomini Patri's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 566
Subtract from E Nomini Patri's ReputationAdd to E Nomini Patri's Reputation E Nomini Patri is a novice
Send a message via MSN to E Nomini Patri
#303
05-31-2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TooMuchButtHair View Post
Lol, I don't think so. Your trying to turn an arguement of semantics into disproof of evolution. It doesn't work that way.
What are you talking about? Your "scientific" claims are laughable because they aren't even supported by the science itself. You then resort to quoting my entire post with a oneliner response to brush off my arguments you can't resolve. Use proper science and refrain from posing as knowledgeable on the topic.

EDIT-You also strawman my position in your second sentence which is the antithesis of an educated debate.


Livin in the ATX sonnnn...
Graphic Design Portfolio | GT: RVG E Nomini | Youtube Channel
TooMuchButtHair
Satisfying women
TooMuchButtHair's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California!
Posts: 3,659
Subtract from TooMuchButtHair's ReputationAdd to TooMuchButtHair's Reputation TooMuchButtHair is a novice
Send a message via AIM to TooMuchButtHair
#304
05-31-2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by E Nomini Patri View Post
What are you talking about? Your "scientific" claims are laughable because they aren't even supported by the science itself. You then resort to quoting my entire post with a oneliner response to brush off my arguments you can't resolve. Use proper science and refrain from posing as knowledgeable on the topic.

EDIT-You also strawman my position in your second sentence which is the antithesis of an educated debate.
I don't have to use any science at all. For the past 150 years, scientists have been piling up evidence for evolution. You, being the one who doesn't believe it, must be the one who is responsible for disproving it. That's basic science, and basic debate. I didn't respond to your last post because I didn't feel it was necessary. I mean, you stand in stark contrast to 150 years of hard science, and then expect me not to ask for you to show your evidence? Come on man...

Quote:
I already know evolution, but you said it's been proven. You have to supply a proof that can demonstrate your claim, even though it severely deviates from the scientific method.
Evolution doesn't deviate from the scientific method at all. Please substantiate your claim. Perhaps I used the word 'proved' interchangably with 'there is a certainty beyond 99% that evolution is accurate', and for that, I you have my sincerest apologies. However, proof that evolution has occured and is visible to your eyes can be found here:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html

Quote:
Yes I do. Perhaps you should name one law in biology as an example, which is impossible because natural law does not necessitate biological law. Quite the hump for you to clear I would think.
And here is we argue semantics even more. Law and fact are alike, but not entirely interchangable. In biology, the word fact must be used instead of law. Nonetheless, evolution is a fact.

Quote:
You misread my post, I said they were only theories before they became facts. Not *the only* theories that became laws. Quantum mechanics and Relativity are still theories, they are not laws anyways. Must I explain to you that theories are cumulations of laws and facts? They can only be disproved or improved. You cannot tear down the pinnacle of the scientific method hierarchy/
I did indeeed misread your post. Nonetheless, often times, things are theories before they become facts. Newtonian Physics was theorized by Newton, and through math and experimentation, he turned his theories into facts.
The study of theology, as it stands in the Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authority; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion.
-Thomas Paine

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prowl View Post
. . .
Chimpanzee (our closest living relative) is a well known homosexual animal.. . .
MarkedAchilles
MarkedAchilles's Avatar
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Gainesville, Fl
Posts: 8,298
Subtract from MarkedAchilles's ReputationAdd to MarkedAchilles's Reputation MarkedAchilles is a novice
#305
05-31-2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by E Nomini Patri View Post
Why is evolution still only a theory? You evolutionists act so clever when the very thing you cling to still has no proof at all in its favor.

First. Read this thead from begining to end.

I am not going to retype what I have already said a million times.

Post when you have a question over what I have already typed out.


-i got kicked out of barnes and noble once for moving all the bibles into the fiction section


Think You Watch Movies? http://www.halo3forum.com/showthread.php?t=81621
E Nomini Patri
Level 21
E Nomini Patri's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 566
Subtract from E Nomini Patri's ReputationAdd to E Nomini Patri's Reputation E Nomini Patri is a novice
Send a message via MSN to E Nomini Patri
#306
05-31-2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TooMuchButtHair View Post
I don't have to use any science at all. For the past 150 years, scientists have been piling up evidence for evolution. You, being the one who doesn't believe it, must be the one who is responsible for disproving it. That's basic science, and basic debate. I didn't respond to your last post because I didn't feel it was necessary. I mean, you stand in stark contrast to 150 years of hard science, and then expect me not to ask for you to show your evidence? Come on man...
I am merely debating your ridiculous position that evolution has been proven. I have repeatedly told you that science doesn't deal with proofs but you conveniently ignore that don't you? You are the one who is against basic science, don't tell me to come on...

Quote:
Originally Posted by TooMuchButtHair View Post
Evolution doesn't deviate from the scientific method at all. Please substantiate your claim. Perhaps I used the word 'proved' interchangably with 'there is a certainty beyond 99% that evolution is accurate', and for that, I you have my sincerest apologies. However, proof that evolution has occured and is visible to your eyes can be found here:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html
I said that your claim that it has been proven deviates from the scientific method. I apologize if that context was not clear enough. However, now you are arguing semantics with me to accomodate your err in claiming evolution has been proven. Science deals not with words in the way you are because it must remain concise. Would you mind reconsidering your argument? Debating can not be initiated without an agreement on definitions, however my definitions are derived from science (this is a science thread) and yours are laymans terms.

That link provides evidence, not proof. I've explained this thoroughly I believe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TooMuchButtHair View Post
And here is we argue semantics even more. Law and fact are alike, but not entirely interchangable. In biology, the word fact must be used instead of law. Nonetheless, evolution is a fact.
Facts are not laws. Laws are facts. I see no opening for confusion about that, seems you found one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TooMuchButtHair View Post
I did indeeed misread your post. Nonetheless, often times, things are theories before they become facts. Newtonian Physics was theorized by Newton, and through math and experimentation, he turned his theories into facts.
Nothing can be theory without being fact in science, lest it be called a hypothesis. Theories don't turn into anything else and I'm surprised at how blatantly you misrepresent what you attempt to argue for.


Livin in the ATX sonnnn...
Graphic Design Portfolio | GT: RVG E Nomini | Youtube Channel
E Nomini Patri
Level 21
E Nomini Patri's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 566
Subtract from E Nomini Patri's ReputationAdd to E Nomini Patri's Reputation E Nomini Patri is a novice
Send a message via MSN to E Nomini Patri
#307
05-31-2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkedAchilles View Post
First. Read this thead from begining to end.

I am not going to retype what I have already said a million times.

Post when you have a question over what I have already typed out.
I've handled the first 3 pages, beast of a thing...


Livin in the ATX sonnnn...
Graphic Design Portfolio | GT: RVG E Nomini | Youtube Channel
MarkedAchilles
MarkedAchilles's Avatar
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Gainesville, Fl
Posts: 8,298
Subtract from MarkedAchilles's ReputationAdd to MarkedAchilles's Reputation MarkedAchilles is a novice
#308
05-31-2007
Default

I will also give you this ONE bit before you read this ENTIRE thread.

Theories > Laws

The answer why is in any science text book or in this thread. In this thread I have just simplified it for people that are not educated or in the science field.


-i got kicked out of barnes and noble once for moving all the bibles into the fiction section


Think You Watch Movies? http://www.halo3forum.com/showthread.php?t=81621
TooMuchButtHair
Satisfying women
TooMuchButtHair's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California!
Posts: 3,659
Subtract from TooMuchButtHair's ReputationAdd to TooMuchButtHair's Reputation TooMuchButtHair is a novice
Send a message via AIM to TooMuchButtHair
#309
05-31-2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by E Nomini Patri View Post
I am merely debating your ridiculous position that evolution has been proven. I have repeatedly told you that science doesn't deal with proofs but you conveniently ignore that don't you? You are the one who is against basic science, don't tell me to come on...
Okay, let me start anew. Evolution is backed by overwhelming evidence. There is proof that it's happened, as it's been observed by human eyes. That proof was provided in several of the links I've posted in this thread and another.

So, we have overwhelming evidence supporting the Theory of Evolution. But, we only have proof that it's occred a few hundred times (those times being observed in laboratories, or via studies).

Are there are problems with that? This entire thing seems like an arguement about semantics more than actual science.
The study of theology, as it stands in the Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authority; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion.
-Thomas Paine

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prowl View Post
. . .
Chimpanzee (our closest living relative) is a well known homosexual animal.. . .
E Nomini Patri
Level 21
E Nomini Patri's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 566
Subtract from E Nomini Patri's ReputationAdd to E Nomini Patri's Reputation E Nomini Patri is a novice
Send a message via MSN to E Nomini Patri
#310
05-31-2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkedAchilles
Theories > Laws
I concur with that, theories explain far more than laws and have a higher utility for making predictions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TooMuchButtHair View Post
Okay, let me start anew. Evolution is backed by overwhelming evidence. There is proof that it's happened, as it's been observed by human eyes. That proof was provided in several of the links I've posted in this thread and another.

So, we have overwhelming evidence supporting the Theory of Evolution. But, we only have proof that it's occred a few hundred times (those times being observed in laboratories, or via studies).

Are there are problems with that? This entire thing seems like an arguement about semantics more than actual science.
Proofs are for maths and alcohol. If you are going to debate using science it would probably help if you know what science says. The correct term would be 'evidence.' It won't remain a semantics debate if you will simply use your semantics in the correct context.


Livin in the ATX sonnnn...
Graphic Design Portfolio | GT: RVG E Nomini | Youtube Channel
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off