Have you seen this article?
I told you our Monday meetings would bear fruit!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070531/sc_nm/orangutans_walking_dc;_ylt=AoUYYqGL0Y5n2q4LIVWoKovQOrgF
2007-06-03 05:29:38 · 13 answers · asked by Kallan 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
beano, are you even aware of the premise of science? They constantly seek answers and revise theories when more evidence is presented.. of COURSE it's going to change.. I would HOPE that they wouldn't stick to outdated theories that fly in the face of evidence.
2007-06-03 05:51:19 · update #1
Yes, I have followed your link and have now read the article. Thanks for enlightening me.
2007-06-03 05:34:41 · answer #1 · answered by carmandnee 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Aargh! All these deeply anti-science answers! Why is science education so pathetic!
Scientists *are* 'evolutionists' ... almost unanimously. That's how you get to be an 'evolutionist', by being interested in science, and the results of the scientific method. So implying that 'evolutionists' are excited by what scientists discover is like saying that scientists and science-lovers are excited about what scientists discover. What's the scientific word for "duh"?!
Second, science advances. Discoveries are made. Theories are modified as a result. Get over it. Where on earth do people get the idea that science needs to be stuck in some unchanging state, like words chiselled on the walls of universities. If science did not change, we'd be stuck in 5th-century B.C. science understanding ... or still shaking leaves over sick people to try and cure them of their evil spirits.
This article says that scientists are adjusting their understanding of exactly when and how bipedality evolved in primates. That's great! But that does not somehow undermine the entire theory of human evolution! That doesn't show a weakness in the scientific method but it shows precisely its *STRENGTH* ... new evidence brings new understanding. It improves the theory, it does not discard it.
Third, yes science articles use words like "suggest" rather than "prove". That means that these scientists have put something out there for other scientists to scrutinize. And these other scientists do scrutinize it. *Relentlessly* scrutinize it. And if the evidence is valid, it is added to the *enormous* stack of evidence that is consistent within the evolutionary model, and the issue of primate bipedality is adjusted.
But even then ... even when the vast majority of scientists accept a finding as pretty conclusive, they never, ever call it "proof" ... it's always "evidence". Again, that is the STRENGTH of science ... it never succumbs to the hubris of believing we EVER know anything for sure. Science is always a growing, changing body of knowledge. Get over it.
Why do you people HATE science so much, that you distort and misinterpret its most *basic* concepts.
2007-06-03 05:51:52 · answer #2 · answered by secretsauce 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I completely agree with Beano. Who in their right mind would place their belief in the flawed theories of scientists, yet reject the inerrant word of God. Only people who don't know the TRUTH when it hits them between the eyes.
2007-06-03 10:31:32 · answer #3 · answered by . 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Creationist: The universe exists
Evolutionist: So?
Creationist: Who done it?
Evolutionist: I don't know.
Creationist: That proves that God did it.
Evolutionist: eh???
v.s.
Evolutionist: monkey walks on two legs.
Creationist: So?
Evolutionist: That's proof God didn't do it.
Creationist: Eh?
or
Emanationist: Causation proceeds downward from the One to the Many, to which the human soul can return to its source through contemplation.
Creationist/Evolutionist: Eh???
2007-06-03 05:34:28 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Gotta love this place!!!! LOL! just to verify, it incredibly is not interior the Netherlands is it? My passport isn't as much as date... particular, i understand that Denmark isn't interior the Netherlands...gotta have some relaxing with that one.
2016-12-12 10:11:42 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ahhh. Scientists changing their theories yet again. But God and His word never changes. I'll never understand how people can blindly follow the ever changing theories of scientists, yet reject outright the unchanging word of God, which has been proven over and over--even by many scientists. Go figure.
Edit: Of course I understand the premise of science--and that it's ever changing as new facts come to light. Which is PRECISELY why I find it ridiculous that people accept every new "proof" that scientists come up with--knowing that their "absolute scientific facts" are not absolute at all. And just to be clear, I'm speaking of evolution here.
2007-06-03 05:37:52 · answer #6 · answered by beano™ 6 · 1⤊ 7⤋
Well, orangutans are somewhat advanced creatures are they not? lol
Thanks for linking to something with a picture of a rello :)
2007-06-03 05:34:50 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Wasn't your avatar facing the other direction just a minute ago?
2007-06-03 05:34:53 · answer #8 · answered by like a BOSS 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
OMG, for a minute I thought you were talking about the other thing on the agenda. Lmao.
2007-06-03 05:33:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
pay close attention to the words used like: suggest, and other speculative words. It is always the same regarding the so-called "science" of evolution. It is ALWAYS littered with words that are suggestive, not certain.
2007-06-03 05:37:53 · answer #10 · answered by Tim 47 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋