Does anybody with an 8th grade education want to explain to Creationists how scientific thory IS fact?

Question

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071214133051AA3Pk8F&cp=2

Sp. thEory, but then you knew that.

Kzinti, yes, a theory consists of related proof via proven hypothesis. A Scientific Theory consists of related facts. The reason it's a theory is because it can't be tested or proven in a laboratory.

Q^ualman, spot on.

You got it Pangel

Answer 1

I am not associated with creationists. However, would any of you brilliant evolutionists care to back your assumptions up with the math. You often say it is very possible, highly probable, never impossible. Show me the math!!! Show me the probabilities.

Take your "eye" example, show me the math at every stage of development. Show me the probabilities of your assumptions at every important point. Then show me all the results.

All you have is assumptions for a failed hypothesis. You do not have a theory.

Journey Well...

Answer 2

I have addressed this issue in other questions in this venue, but because it is you who has asked I will try it once more.

I do have an 8th grade education so I guess I qualify.

There really is nothing wrong with the Biblical Account of creation. The problem arises when creationists read the Bible with blinders on.

Science tells us that this universe was formed approximately 2.4 billion years ago. There is nothing in the scriptures that disputes that assertion.

Of course there are those who will now say that the earth was created in seven days. Here is where they need to take off the blinders. The elements that needed to be in place to determine what a "day" is were not in place until the 4th period of darkness and light. When we take into consideration that time is only measured to mortal existance it might help to put things in perspective. The stars that we see in the night sky are beautiful indeed. Given the fact that many of them are more than a hundred million light years from earth (meaning it took that light at least that long to reach this fly speck of a planet); if then the universe were created only a few thousand years ago, there would be no stars to look at.

There is no way to measure the span of time in between what is termed darkness and what is termed light, in the Bible. It is certain that it is not what we know as darkness and light because the sun, moon stars etc, were not made until the 4th period called day and night.

I hope that suffices as an explaination coming from at least an 8th grade observer.

Take off the blinders and apply science to what you read and you will find more compatability than you can imagine.

Answer 3

In explaining the Theory of Evolution in which assumption, guess, billion years or lie do you explain the fact. In the Origen of the Human Specie and in the ever changing fossil evidence that can't be found - where is the new information?

The theory of evolution by natural selection is a cop-out. Natural selection which is survival of the fittest has always been around and long before Darwin. Natural Selection comes straight out of the Bible. The Scientist have had a hay day with trying to get around the lies of that missing link, that ever changing specie. God says there is none. We produce after our kind. There is no new information. Mutations and afflictions have always been due to sin and they will always be a curse to mankind. Proverbs 26:2 " ... a curse without a cause does not come."

The word "evolution" alone means nothing but distortion, fraud, lies, dissension and down right hypocrisy in the scientific community. It was presented wrong to begin with because the main purpose was to discredit God. It would never, I mean never, have made it this far without a massive cover up by educated arrogance. Within a University, if you go against the grain you don't remain at the University for very long.

Answer 4

Frankly, since I'm only 32, and the earth's been around for a bit longer, I can't really say for sure whether evolution is a viable culprit on which to "blame" life or not. I wasn't there.

I know that there are species that can adapt and change pretty quickly, but whether that changing can in fact produce the diversity of life we have in the time frame defined by fossil records is a question I don't know the answer to.

Yes I'm a Christian, and as such, I believe in the Creation as recorded in Genesis.

At the same time, I also acknowledge the force evolution has exerted on life as we know it. (Here's a paper bag to breathe into... don't pass out, now.... relax... there ya go- you'll be ok.)





My personal feelings are that God created the earth, life, etc. but death wasn't part of the equation till after Adam and Eve left the Garden. Once death began to happen, evolution could begin to affect the life God created.

Answer 5

Ha ha.. this is humorous stuff. Creationists are in basic terms a hoot. human beings believe what they are taught to believe. this is complicated to permit go of something that everybody who has had an result on your existence says is nice. it is annoying to "show" something, regardless of the undeniable fact that. Even in arithmetic, each and every thing is in accordance with an assumption (and mathematicians consent to this fact). it is why they have proofs. I undergo in suggestions an intro. math class I had while i all started college that became into the 1st ingredient our instructor pronounced. you could desire to look on the situation objectively, to comprehend the different edge. while you argue that there have been no slip united statesin this meant conspiracy, creationists would say the comparable ingredient. whether a flaw is latest of their good judgment, some clarification would be discovered to describe it. Evolutionists do the comparable, it is declared as theorizing. while something now no longer works with the certainty we've, we modify it. I advise, the international became into flat, different ethnicity's weren't human... and Pluto became right into a planet.... :) So we don't understand each and every thing, no person does. So for my own sanity, i believe what i believe and that i won't be able to condemn somebody for their ideals, whether they are far fetched to me. it would be superb to have some extra solutions, yet till then, I attempt to no longer decrease cost or stick to all people elses.

Answer 6

Well, "theory" is not "fact." The words mean different things. I will be right back with an explanation as to how these words are often misused.


Read this carefully:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Arn68LXao1iGL4UqtHzgAg_ty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20070111120752AAAHvcX

Answer 7

I would, but it isn't.
"In the most basic sense, a scientific fact is an objective and verifiable observation; in contrast with a hypothesis or theory, which is intended to explain or interpret facts." -Gower, Barry (1997). Scientific Method: A Historical and Philosophical Introduction. Routledge. ISBN 0415122821, quoted on Wikipedia.

Answer 8

What's a "scientific thory"? Is that anything like a scientific theory?

Can anybody with an 8th grade education teach this guy to spell?

Answer 9

I answered the specified question as follows:

No. We have learned a few things since Darwin's day, and now know how the eye and many other structures evolved. Evolution is now a proven fact; details are available on request (please provide an e-mail address). For a good history of evolution on this planet, see:

Answer 10

Are you aware you just stated an oxymoron?

you said scientific THEORY is a fact.

If it were a fact, it would no longer be a theory.

No ninth grade for you!

.