Will you please give me a couple of facts?

(July 6, 2014 at 10:32 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Wow. Not reading all that text but to answer your question, the theory of evolution is a body of scientific facts, not faith.

(July 12, 2014 at 1:05 am)alexwenzel Wrote: Will you please give me a couple of facts?

(July 6, 2014 at 10:32 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Wow. Not reading all that text but to answer your question, the theory of evolution is a body of scientific facts, not faith.

Facts.

Quote:All available evidence supports the central conclusions of evolutionary theory, that life on Earth has evolved and that species share common ancestors. Biologists are not arguing about these conclusions.

Yes. But this is too complex for creatards and for them we have the Buy Bull.

(July 12, 2014 at 2:07 am)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:All available evidence supports the central conclusions of evolutionary theory, that life on Earth has evolved and that species share common ancestors. Biologists are not arguing about these conclusions.

Yes. But this is too complex for creatards and for them we have the Buy Bull.

Because reading one book is a lot easier then reading a lot of hard ones

(July 12, 2014 at 2:09 am)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: Because reading one book is a lot easier then reading a lot of hard ones

Which is strange, because the bible is technically multiple books, and given the number of contradictions and apparently constant switches between literal and figurative language, it'd seem like a pretty hard series of books to get through too.

But then, we are assuming that they've even read the bible, here. Instead of, say, imposing their own meaning upon certain select passages and ignoring the rest...

(July 10, 2014 at 6:38 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Today, I got a link to a playlist of TED talks, the 20 most viewed, or something like that.
In one of them, there was a guy talking about motivating people to buy a product from some company and he outlined what he called the "golden circle": a 3 concentric circles bulls-eye.
At the center, he put "why", in the middle he put "what" and at the outermost layer, he put "how".
And he said that most companies work from the outside inwards.
But the truly great companies work from the inside out.

That's Simon Sinek.

(July 10, 2014 at 6:38 pm)pocaracas Wrote: So, back to these creatards. If we want to captivate them, we have to make them understand "why" we think the way we think, "why" evolution is correct... only then can we say what evolution is and how it works.
"why", the motivation that makes everything else fall in place.

We've been going at this all wrong, probably due to the creatards' fault always starting the conversation on some "conceived" faults of evolution... we keep showing them "how" evolution works and a bit of "what" it is..... we never show them "why". Our inner reason to accept it.

So, "why" is evolution right? "why" should I consider evolution? (Remember, this is not a "how" nor "what" question!)

I'll give it a shot: Given mutations, millions of years and billions and billions of creatures, you'd need a mechanism that prevents evolution from happening. Like a reset-button.

Evolution in the vein of paleontology is a science for those who like to make a lot of mistakes because of guessing and extrapolation and pass it off as fact.

(July 12, 2014 at 9:51 am)Polaris Wrote: Evolution in the vein of paleontology is a science for those who like to make a lot of mistakes because of guessing and extrapolation and pass it off as fact.

Maybe, but just because some people have some beliefs does not make evolution, or its study, a faith. In order to do that, you'd have to have one particular dumb idea forced onto a whole population, with no willingness to collect further information or address new ideas.

Not even paleontology as you've described it would do something that dumb.

(July 12, 2014 at 9:51 am)Polaris Wrote: Evolution in the vein of paleontology is a science for those who like to make a lot of mistakes because of guessing and extrapolation and pass it off as fact.

Paleontology does lead to mistakes including whoopers like mistaking different developmental stages of the same animal for different species. But that's about the details of evolution.

As evidence of evolution's existence, paleontology is unmistakeable and overwhelming. The record runs from single cell to multi-cell. And complex forms are invariably elaborations of other complex forms. Geographic separation inevitably leads to differing forms. The greater the separation, the greater the differences. Hence the marsupial.

(July 12, 2014 at 11:41 am)Jenny A Wrote:

(July 12, 2014 at 9:51 am)Polaris Wrote: Evolution in the vein of paleontology is a science for those who like to make a lot of mistakes because of guessing and extrapolation and pass it off as fact.

Paleontology does lead to mistakes including whoopers like mistaking different developmental stages of the same animal for different species. But that's about the details of evolution.

As evidence of evolution's existence, paleontology is unmistakeable and overwhelming. The record runs from single cell to multi-cell. And complex forms are invariably elaborations of other complex forms. Geographic separation inevitably leads to differing forms. The greater the separation, the greater the differences. Hence the marsupial.

That's a matter of debate really. Big one. The guy making that proposal is known for being way out in left field, and because of that he has done some important work, but his suggestion that three species of pachycephlasaurs are the same species is a little out there because it would mean that adolescents grow 6-7 inch spikes on their skulls only to have them reduced to bumps as adults.