/lit/ - Literature

every scientific theory functions in a way it can be disproven if certain facts or theory come out.
Meanwhile, evolution, while being the current paradigm, seems entirely unfalsifiable (Poppers prerequisite for scientific theory). like the test for real witch - If she dies she is probably a witch, if she survives she isnt.

Example 1: if it survives its more adapted (ergo superior), if it doesnt its less adapted (ergo inferior). That kind of logic should also apply to human races so if whitey dies, he actually wasnt the masterrace, if he survives he actually is. This is mythology and circular reasoning, not scientific reasoning.

Example 2: "useless human body parts". Appendix and wisdom teeth are considered an evolutionary relic...until few years ago when appendix was discovered to be very usefull (before that they were even removing perfectly healthy uninflamed appendixes from humans because "it served no purpuse") for keeping gut bacteria. Wisdom teeth? Idk I still have them.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071008102334.htm

What is very interesting here, that despite the wrong prediction, you can still spin it as "evolution made the appendix", there is no factual scenario that falsifies evolution. ITS UNFALSIFIABLE. In the end theory of evolution doesnt predict anything like a good sci theory should, but explains things backwards.

>>20618337
>Finding rabbit fossils in precambrian would actually be a huge blow to scientific understanding of evolutionary history.

yes, you would need to revision a lot of things. It would be revisioned and it would be right again...sounds familiar?

>But of course dishonest creationists would rather think up than do some due diligence

you are right every time, why arent you happy?

>>17546547
>unironically deny evolution

its a catch 22 theory...is it not? If you think otherwise make a list of human vestigial parts or testable PREDICTIONS made by evolution? All I see is RETROACTIVE explanations, all I see is pseudoscience/pseudothery.


>>17546564
>I have changed my mind about the testability and logical status of the theory of natural selection; and I am glad to have an opportunity to make a recantation. . . . [p. 345]

poor man was put into a corner...

daily reminder that some doctors removed perfectly healthy appendixes because they though it was vestigial. This was some 10 years ago. #evidenceBasedScience

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/08/090820175901.htm

>>15572359
>This means that certain phenotypes in animals are more desirable than others (for said animal's specific situation), so the genotypes that lead to desirable phenotypes are more likely to remain in this species' gene pool.

interesting and how do you FALSIFY that sicne longterm esch coli exp was a total flop, you know the one where you SELECTED for some traits and claimed MUTATION.

>>15572386
>This is what "missing link" is about.

but we will le find proofs in near future so you have to believe in it now!

>>15572387
>Most of the metaphysics that hold up science are not testable science.

ok, so what is the problem?

>>14310678
appendinx was considered vestigial for 100years, not that that gnoseological bubble is bursting they just revision it

www.livescience.com/10571-appendix-fact-promising.html

>No less than Charles Darwin first suggested that the appendix was a vestigial organ from an ancestor that ate leaves, theorizing that it was the evolutionary remains of a larger structure, called a cecum, which once was used by now-extinct predecessors for digesting food.

>>14310728
>They readjusted their opinions in the face of contrary evidence.

they can readjust everthing and it all fits. HOW CONVINIENT! Sounds like the most PERFECT theory! NICE!

>x has y because its a trait acquired by evolution
>what is the proof that it is aquired by evolutioin and not full blown YECrationist?
>because it has y

appendix was considdered vestigial up unti few years ago, guess we made a mistake when we removed uninflamed appendixes tee hee, now its an evolutionary adaptation, I FCK LOOOOOVE SCIENCE!!!!!

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071008102334.htm

every scientific theory functions in a way it can be disproven if certain facts or theory come out.
Meanwhile, evolution, while being the current paradigm, seems entirely unfalsifiable (Poppers prerequisite for scientific theory). like the test for real witch - If she dies she is probably a witch, if she survives she isnt.

Example 1: if it survives its more adapted (ergo superior), if it doesnt its less adapted (ergo inferior). That kind of logic should also apply to human races so if whitey dies, he actually wasnt the masterrace, if he survives he actually is. This is mythology and circular reasoning, not scientific reasoning.

Example 2: "useless human body parts". Appendix and wisdom teeth are considered an evolutionary relic...until few years ago when appendix was discovered to be very usefull for keeping gut bacteria. Wisdom teeth? Idk I still have them.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071008102334.htm

In the end theory of evolution doesnt predict anything like a good sci theory should, but explains things backwards.
discuss.

example of pseudoscientific thinking inspired by evolution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QDoMaPOqi4

every scientific theory functions in a way it can be disproven if certain facts or theory come out.
Meanwhile, evolution, while being the current paradigm, seems entirely unfalsifiable (Poppers prerequisite for scientific theory). like the test for real witch - If she dies she is probably a witch, if she survives she isnt.

Example 1: if it survives its more adapted (ergo superior), if it doesnt its less adapted (ergo inferior). That kind of logic should also apply to human races so if whitey dies, he actually wasnt the masterrace, if he survives he actually is. This is mythology and circular reasoning, not scientific reasoning.

Example 2: "useless human body parts". Appendix and wisdom teeth are considered an evolutionary relic...until few years ago when appendix was discovered to be very usefull for keeping gut bacteria. Wisdom teeth? Idk I still have them.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071008102334.htm

In the end theory of evolution doesnt predict anything like a good sci theory should, but explains things backwards.
discuss.

example of pseudoscientific thinking inspired by evolution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QDoMaPOqi4

every scientific theory functions in a way it can be disproven if certain facts or theory come out.
Meanwhile, evolution, while being the current paradigm, seems entirely unfalsifiable (Poppers prerequisite for scientific theory). like the test for real witch - If she dies she is probably a witch, if she survives she isnt.

Example 1: if it survives its more adapted (ergo superior), if it doesnt its less adapted (ergo inferior). That kind of logic should also apply to human races so if whitey dies, he actually wasnt the masterrace, if he survives he actually is. This is mythology and circular reasoning, not scientific reasoning.

Example 2: "useless human body parts". Appendix and wisdom teeth are considered an evolutionary relic...until few years ago when appendix was discovered to be very usefull for keeping gut bacteria. Wisdom teeth? Idk I still have them.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071008102334.htm

In the end theory of evolution doesnt predict anything like a good sci theory should, but explains things backwards.
discuss.

example of pseudoscientific thinking inspired by evolution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QDoMaPOqi4