/sci/ - Science & Math

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QBv2CFTSWU&feature=related

The only idiots using the word "evolutionist" is christians who have beef with science. They made it up, and everyone else wishes they hadn't.

>>3645744

That may be, but every moron that tells me they believe in evolution really pisses me off.

Because, OP, much more than the other current scientific theories, evolution seems to contradict a literal interpretation of the bible.
Physicists went through this same BS in the 1500's with geocentrism vs. heliocentrism, which at the time contradicted the current interpretation of the bible.
The only difference is that now, those people aren't the ones in power.

>>3645777

but the only people who take the bible literally are born again christians and jews.

I understand what your confusion, so I'll tell you exactly why. Evolution is held by most atheist scientists (a sizable portion) at an almost religious level because it is the only alternative to intelligent design in science, and hence, theism. By large amounts, evolution is treated as more than simple theory that doesn't even have any evidence (only logical plausibility), and hence religious point this out. You can see this in how much evolution is widespread in our culture, and the level it has reached in our collective ideas, because it's so lobbied for. You really got to be in the mesh of things to understand this, I'll understand if this completely takes you by surprise.

>>3645777
>>3645777
geocentrism vs. heliocentrism has nothing to do with the Bible. it was people who didnt like the idea, not any scripture.

>>3645781

>implying jews take the bible literally

You obviously have never met a jew.
As far as my experience with the jewish community has been (my grandparents and their experiences within the jewish community) most jews recognize that the bible is not to be taken literally.
Also
>mfw jews are HUGE SUPPORTERS of science
>mfw jews make up a large proportion of scientists
>mon visage quand je n'ai pas un visage.

>"We're smarter than ever these days"
>we need to teach everything so they can make their own decision. We need to teach all sides
>only evolution and the biblical account
>mfw that's not even close to all the sides of story

>>3645795
From my history of science courses, I could have sworn that it had to do with the then-interpretation of a verse which said something to the effect that the earth is the center of the universe.
Same thing with the "perfect motion" of heavenly bodies being circular, and an ellipse is herecy.

>>3645795
But it abruptly implies that the Earth is not the center of the universe

The bible makes it clear that the universe was, any way you put it, created for humans

this would have caused people to question that notion

>>3645786
>>3645786
this guy has it right.
real scientists question everything. if a scientist puts his full faith into theory (evolutionary biologists), than they really arent looking at it from a scientific point of view are they?
It is a certain kind of person that purports the theory of evolution as fact, and that is someone who is either oblivious to the alternatives to, and flaws inherent to evolution, or someone who has an ulterior motive that is more against religion than for science.
pic related, if i were to turn in data like this to my professor, he would call me out on fabricating data. having an artist sculpt a skull though is commonplace among evolutionary research.

>>3645827

Almost sounds like you're saying evolution is incorrect...

>>3645827
yep, that artist just went with his imagination, there's no science involved.

>>3645822
>>3645822
that is a stretch if i ever saw one. can you back that claim up with some Bible verses?

>>3645818
>>3645818
same for you. present you evidence please

Evolution is a fact

>>3645827
>>3645786
The reason the majourity of (intelligent) people take evolution as near-fact is the that amount of fucking evidence it has as well as the predictions we can make from it. The same goes for the standard model of physics. Why aren't christians fighting that tooth and nail?

More importantly, there aren't any other alternatives to evolution worth paying attention to.

>>3645834
>>3645834
honestly, what science WAS involved? all I ever get presented with are bits of bone squished into a clay "skull", or hand drawn pictures of the process.
how do they know thats what they looked like? I would think that if they really had hard evidence, then religions would have to change their outlook.
what science goes into the shapes of these missing links, and painted images?
pic related

>>3645851

You are a mouth breather.

>>3645835
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model#Reluctance_to_change

If only I'd brought my Natural Science in Western History book I'd be able to give you something more specific.

Also, perhaps it wasn't a specific verse in the bible, but it was an interpretation of the Bible & messages therein which caused people to question it, as suggested by the wiki article.

I am shit with history, but I do tend to remember the gist of things.

>>3645851
>>3645851
thats weird how a bunch of mormons and other christians are able to become medical doctors, psychiatrists, and surgeons even though they dont believe in evolution...

>>3645853

You want the evidence for evolution?
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/lines_01
It's presented in a friendly format so that even thickskulls can understand it.
Have fun.

>>3645860
>>3645860
no, I want actual scripture saying how the earth is the center of the universe. that is the claim you made.
>Physicists went through this same BS in the 1500's with geocentrism vs. heliocentrism, which at the time contradicted the current interpretation of the bible.
I dont care about the general attitude of the time, I want you to show me that they were getting their state of mind from actual Biblical scripture. otherwise your argument falls apart and a christian Bible never supported the idea of Earth being the center of the universe.

>creationists argue about artist interpretation of early man not being accurate or based in science
>totally forget to mention massive biological and physical anthropological evidence supporting evolution

Stay intellectually juvenile creationists

>>3645833
>>3645834
>>3645839
>>3645851
>>3645868

Nothing to see here but trolls trolling.

Move along.

>>3645863
>implying those religions aren't both full of fear mongering dogma that inhibits free thought leading to extremely ignorant mindsets

fuck your couch, nigga

>>3645883
fine, post some evidence that is not doctored by clay or a paintbrush.

and if you are able, explain how it knows aesthetically pleasing mathematical ratios

>>3645886
lol the last one, you understand how silly it is? Saying you can't prove there is no god is like saying you can't prove chairs can't talk because we don't speak chair

it takes zero faith to not believe in something that doesn't exist

>>3645881

You want me to pull a specific verse from the bible which could potentially have been interpreted as meaning that the earth was at the center of the universe?

Unfortunately I cannot do that.
But at the same time, even the account of genesis doesn't contradict evolution in certain interpretations, and that very interpretation is what is at the center of the issue. "Creationists" argue that the lord created everything as-is, exactly as stated in the bible, which directly contradicts evolution. But other branches of Christianity interpret the account in genesis differently and find no contradiction.

>>3645895
>>3645895
still didnt answer my question. how can someone know so much about the human body, but ignore its alleged history? wouldnt it be beneficial for them to know the historical origins of certain afflictions in order to cure them?

>evolutionists
>theoretical science
>mfw creationist terms

>>3645896

SEE
>>3645868
>>3645868>>3645868
>>3645868
>>3645868

Also, if you're having other specific doubts, how about you check here first:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

>>3645907

It would only be useful for certain branches of things, like those who make vaccinations and have to predict the pattern of mutation of viruses in order to successfully make vaccines.
You don't need to accept evolution in order to determine that someone has strep throat, or a low white blood cell count, or a broken leg.

>>3645906
evolution and creationism cannot co-exist unless you know nothing about evolution

>>3645906
>>3645906
the Genesis account is in direct opposition to evolution, i never argued the opposite. I just think that while you claim creationists are brainwashed, you ought to take a step back and ponder where the motivation of evolution supporters comes from. If it really were to further science, then occasionally questioning evolution would only serve to advance science. they however take it as fact despite the fact the observance of what they claim has never actually happened. you would ask creationists to question what they believe, but would you follow through on the same?

question everything, except evolution

>>3645924
>its only useful for curing diseases, other than that what use does having knowledge of evolution have

zeldalaugh.jpg

rebut with this

>>3645941
this is analogous to questioning whether or not gravity exists, the mechanisms behind what exactly gravity is changes daily, the same goes for the mechanisms that drive evolution, that's why its called the theory of evolution, the theory of gravity

evolution and gravity are facts, the theory is what describes the facts, so why should one question a fact

>>3645953
rebut with this

>>3645964
its not though. I can jump up at anytime of the day, hell, i even experience gravity by just being aware ouf whats around me every waking moment.
I have never seen a shrub evolve into a tree, or a mouse into a rat. evolution is a bold claim, like Rutherford's claim that everything is mostly nothing. he was able to provide evidence based on what he could measure, not what he suspected based off of a very rudimentary idea of a cell, or what some animals kinda looked like to Darwin.
I have never experienced evolution or have a method to test it. why is it analogous to gravity?

>>3645941

EXCEPT THAT WE DO QUESTION ASPECTS OF EVOLUTION ALL THE FUCKING TIME

WE QUESTION HOW IT BEGAN, THE CONDITIONS AND BUILDING BLOCKS OF LIFE AND THERE ARE A SHIT TON OF THEORIES AND PEOPLE ARGUING ABOUT THEM

WE STUDY AND IMPROVE AND ARGUE ABOUT MODELS OF EVOLUTION SUCH AS THE HARDY-WEINBERG EQUILIBRIUM

WE QUESTION WHEN SPECIES DIVERGE ALL THE TIME AND THERE ARE A SHIT TON OF THEORIES FOR EVERY SPECIES OF WHEN THEY EMERGED AND PLENTY OF PEOPLE WILL ARGUE WITH EACH OTHER ABOUT THAT

WE SIT AND QUESTION EVERY SINGLE FUCKING FOSSIL THAT COMES IN IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE ME JUST DO A SEARCH ON SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS RELATED TO ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS

SCIENTISTS QUESTION EVERY SINGLE FUCKING THING IN EXISTENCE. THATS THE IDEA BEHIND SCIENCE. SOMETIMES WE MEET THEORIES SO OVERWHELMINGLY STRONG, WITH EVIDENCE SO VAST AND ENDLESS THAT WE DON'T EVEN BOTHER TO ARGUE WHETHER IT IS FACT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A WASTE OF TIME TO DO OTHERWISE.

YES I MAD. I MAD BECAUSE YOU ARE SOMEHOW PUTTING SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION ON THE SAME LEVEL AS BLIND FAITH AND THAT SHIT JUST AINT FUCKIN COOL

>>3645907
>how can someone know so much about the human body, but ignore its alleged history?
I already told you, they never think about questioning their religion because they are terrified of going to hell. It creates extremely unbalanced individuals. I know a girl who is a stellar law student and was good in science too. She's extremely smart, yet a staunch creationist. Also because of her religion, she's also a homophobic bigot. So to clarify, the reason these people can be so educated in one area while being so ignorant in another, is that religion inhibits free thinking (especially Christianity) and breeds ignorance.

Let me ask you something, when you were a kid lets say adults told you that Alice and Wonderland was how the world worked, and that the hookah smoking caterpillar was god, and if you didn't believe in him you were going to hell. Do you think you'd call bullshit? Of course not, you'd believe it out of fear and obviously kids believe adults because they don't know any better. So tell me, what's the
difference? Why believe one fairy tale and not another?

>wouldnt it be beneficial for them to know the historical origins of certain afflictions in order to cure them?
Well of course it would. It would also be beneficial if nutjobs like Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry weren't so extremely ignorant and deluded. It would be great if there were no religious extremists who so frequently turn to violence in the name of their god. It would be great if a woman had the right to do whatever she wanted with her body, freely. It would be awesome if we could use stem cells so people who have horrible injuries and problems could live better lives. Sadly we can't live in that world because of self righteous zealots, but a world without religion would be a wonderful place.

>>3645967
yeah I've been tracking your posts you clever troll. You even caught a few chumps with your trollbait. Also nice samefagging.

>>3645953
Maybe I'm weird, but I'd take the alchemy class.

>>3645981
>shrub evolve into a tree, or a mouse into a rat.

lol what is this, is this guy serious?

>>3645981
>why is it analogous to gravity?

evolution and gravity are both known to be facts because there is enormous amounts of observable evidence to prove them

fossil record bro

>>3645981
you should know that evolution takes millions of years if you were attempting to understand the arguments of the other side. Are you millions of years old?

Furthermore, you don't get to have an opinion in a disagreement if you aren't actively seeking to completely understand the other side. Many atheists today started out as Christians, including me. The same can't be said for Christians, however. Unless you count people being atheist when they are born (which every human ever was before being indoctrinated).

>>3645983
>>3645983
yes, but all within the context of evolution. you question "which section of evolution does this data fit best", not "does this data really support what we think we know?"
what scientist ha ever said 'wait guys, this doesnt add up, maybe we ought to rethink the basis of this whole structure' and kept their job?
I know I can name a few who lost theirs for merely mentioning that evolution might not work.

>>3646007
your fossil record is a painting/cartoon of a chimp turning into a human.
I cant draw cold fusion happening and say that it actually works that way.
if evolution is a process that takes billions of years, then archaeologists should be tripping over fossil evidence. there should be billions of years worth of fossils that can be sent out to every high school in the nation and remove all doubt. but you are only able to come up with a small handful of partial 'Lucys', that somehow equate to piles of evidence.

>>3646011
ok name a few

how can someone question differential reproduction and the inheritance of traits? if they do they are delusional and have certainly lost their capacity for science

>>3646011
>I know I can name a few who lost theirs for merely mentioning that evolution might not work

Name them

Also, the reason a scientist who doesnt support evolution loses his job or is shunned by the community is because he's obviously extremely ignorant. The evidence is there man, and it's overwhelmingly supportive of the current theory of how evolution works

Nah, just kidding nigga, some guy totally made all this just for shits and giggles, yet he gave the smarter ones the capacity to question and doubt his existence, thus damning them to eternal lake of fire. Makes perfect sense

>>3646027
less than 1% of 1% of 1% of 1% of 1% of living organisms are fossilized, if they were all fossilized, fossils would be growing outwardly into space at the speed of light until the mass of fossils collapses under its own gravity creating a black hole of fossils

>>3646027
confirmed for troll

If you really hold these beliefs I feel extremely sorry for you

>Unless you count people being agnostic when they are born (which every human ever was before being indoctrinated)

ftfy

>>3645981
>I have never seen a shrub evolve into a tree, or a mouse into a rat.
this is not how evolution works at all, mice and rats are descendant from a relatively recent common ancestor. no modern speicies ever changes into another modern species, evolution is about divergence of species. as it happens there is a quite detailed fossil record showing the transition from a chimp like ancestor to modern humans through intermediates such as astralopithecus, homo habilis, homo ergastor homo heidelbergensis and finaly homo sapiens

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/

>>3646011
its not like Einstein tried to collect more data and improve on the Michelson–Morley experiment (and others), he rethought what physicists thought they knew, and that led to a breakthrough which contradicts Newtonian physics. evolution is over 200 years old and no one has stood out to Darwin as much as Einstein did to Newton (in almost the same span of time).

>>3646045
well if evolution were true than why aren't we all gay if we evolved from homos

>>3645729

Evolutionary theory is a lot like computational theory in that it provides basic criteria which could apply to almost any kind of physical system. Anything meeting that criteria can be said to evolve.

Evolution is consistent with God not existing, but it's also perfectly consistent with things like God existing (as long as God doesn't eliminate things like replication)

Adam and Eve could have suddenly popped into existence, and as long as their offspring had genes and faced environmental pressure the offspring would still evolve.

>>3646047
let's examine your logic:

>Einstein rewrote physics and proved a lot of Newton's physics wrong
>Charles Darwin must be wrong

MEANWHILE

No religion has ever been updated or reassessed for its accuracy. The Bible was written 2000 years ago by men who didnt even understand what light was and what gravity is. We're driving remote control cars on Mars and cracking atoms but yeah totally dude, the bible nailed it on the first go

>>3646043
0/10

>not "does this data really support what we think we know?"

well buddy thats because EVERY FUCKING THING IN BIOLOGY POINTS TO EVOLUTION FROM ANCESTRAL SPECIES

do you have any idea how many proteins you have in common with EVERY FUCKING SPECIES ON THE PLANET? and even when these proteins are not the same they seem to be EERILY SIMILAR AS IF THEY WERE ONCE THE SAME PROTEIN. And not just proteins, how about glucose? Somehow, nearly EVERY FUCKING SPECIES IN EXISTENCE uses glucose as a primary fuel source. This is analogous to discovering that english, french, german, spanish and italian all have latin roots except you are saying:

>no dumbass, clearly these languages have too many rules and differences and they couldn't have possibly originated from a single language. I think Jesus did it

it is just plain STUPID to say evolution is not the most logical, most acceptable model for species divergence and by now it should be obvious to you that ANY biologist who claims that evolution couldn't possibly work DESERVES the scorn and shame of the scientific community

>>3646057
homo is latin for human

>>3646036
>>3646036

Dr. Michael Egnor - neurosurgery professor

Dr. Caroline Crocker - fired fro George Mason U.

Dr. Richard Sternberg - part time writer for Smithsonian journals

astrophysicist Dr. Guillermo Gonzalez

Dr. Robert Marks

>>3646073
just pointing out that english is based on german and german is not based off latin

>>3646083
so 5 people

out of millions of scientists

lol, really man, that's your argument?

>>3646069
>>3646069
obviously my post was over your head.
basically what i was saying was that Einstein took a differnt train of thought than what the scientific community would have advised, and he turned out to be right.
the current scientific community has been working on evolution, and doesnt advise any alternate theories.
do you see any similarities/differences between the two?

>>3646093
So just because no one has proved Darwin wrong you assume that no scientists are trying? Do you really think there aren't evolutionary biologists that strive to break the mold and become legends?

you just went full retard

You can show that 'microevolution' occurs with flies in just a couple of weeks.
Of course, once you've show 'microevolution' occurs, you've show Evolution occurs, too.

>>3645967
I laughed at the key.

>>3646093
but evolution has probably the largest group of people (creationists) attempting to come up with alternative theories since darwin wrote his book and not a single viable hypothesis has been put forward that casts doubt on evolutionary theory to date

>>3646069
>>3646069
also the Bible is scrutinized every chance it gets.
John McArthur has learned a couple of dead languages so that he could study the oldest texts of the Bible and compare them to what it says today. The dead sea scrolls also presented an opportunity to reright the bible, but wasnt needed because they said the same thing.
the Bible's accuracy is under constant scrutiny from both sides, yet it still exists.
I cant speak on that for the theory of evolution, because those who hold it as dear as some do the bible wont let it be scrutinized by either side under the guise of "irrefutable science"

>>3645967
If I could somehow bottle the amount of butthurt that it took to make this image I could sell it and make millions

>>3646116
>the Bible's accuracy is under constant scrutiny from both sides, yet it still exists.
>yet it still exists

so something existing proves it's right? What about the other 5000 religions? What makes them wrong and you right?

>>3646116
thats the accuracy of text copying, which has nothing to do with the accuracy of the ideas presented in the text

>>3646126
exactly, if u subscribe to one religion it means you are atheistic towards all others except your own

come on creationist, i can belittle your intellect all night

>>3646073
>>3646073
maybe common proteins point to a common creator. like common bolts and engines in two different models of a Ford Pickup, or similarities in windows operating systems. a common creator/programmer
do they consider that as an alternate theory?

>>3646090
>>3646090
its more than you were able to name

Pic related

>>3646141
If a creator exists, none of the earthly religions can explain it, they're all wrong. If a religion is right, why isn't it lining up with the science? I'm sorry, but if you side with faith and assumption over evidence and mathematics, you're pretty stupid.

evolution just seems like common sense to me.

the stronger gorilla will fuck up its rivals and reproduce more successfully. and this slowly causes changes to a species.

i don't understand how this just isn't accepted.

>>3646100
>>3646100
im saying you, and your friends arent open minded enough to even entertain the idea he might have been wrong.

>>3646109
>>3646109
you can show fusion occurs, so then does that mean cold fusion occurs?

>>3646158
because it's illogical to doubt something that is supported by massive amounts of physical evidence and research

are you going to doubt that you're alive? or that the sky is blue and water is wet?

>>3646112
>>3646112
or you are unwilling to except the doubt the portray?

>>3646156
the same reason it was only discovered relatively recently, even though it is quite a simple concept. it is in opposition to how people want things to be, and so they reject it because 'thats not how i think things are, i'm just going to dismiss this and continue believing more reasuring ideas'

Not exactly... I good part of comunitty sciente believe that Evolution (Natural Selection, Genetic Drift, Mutation, Gene Flow) make sense, not only it. It can be proved too (And refuted on some few cases, if you ask me)

Well, some people like to believe on dimensional selfcreated thing, others on clearly fake book, others on magazine and other just trow them self on science thinking that science is always right. All of them are weak "believers", they don't have rational and emotional base, so they just hook something that FIT them. Like any believer. They don't REALLY believe on it. They just... put dirt on things that they don't compreend.

"I like to look smart, i will choose evolutionism, derp..." or "I like to be powerful, derp hurp, i will choose creationism." and so goes on.

>>3646174
STOP.
USING.
GOOGLE.
TRANSLATE.

>>3646127
>>3646127
you have to know the language to correctly copy the meaning in the text

>mfw creationists think only fossil records are used

Molecular evidence owns your shit.

>>3646166
i actually went to a christian school (in australia) and was taught creationism and a manipulated version of evolution, when you look at both arguments without bias there is just no doubt to which has the supporting evidence

>>3646156
>>3646156
but we have become drastically different from whatever gorilla our ancestor was. where does the new information come from if the original gorilla (OG) is killing off other genetic information?
it assumes new information not only is created from less information, but that it is constantly being created out of an increasingly limited amount of information that survived

>>3646165
>>3646165
no, but at least i can conduct experiments to test the wetness of water, or the color of sky. can you conduct experiments to test the genetic changes between a lineage of house cats?

>>3646196

Evolution comes partly from genetic drift - wherein no 'information' is created or destroyed, merely altered in its expression - and partly from mutation, which usually entails change in the information, and significantly more rarely additions or subtractions.

This is why the fish from an earlier post changed color rapidly (the genetics for the different color scheme were there already, just not expressed), but it takes millions of years for a fish species to evolve to walk on land (because genetic mutation is relatively rare).

>>3646196
learn to genetics
yes mutations can either remove or add extra information to the DNA code, but there are also copying errors such as deletion, duplication, inversion and translocation which can all change the DNA sequence resulting in slight changes to the offspring. the removal of eg a gorrilla from the population means that there is less competition for the offsrping of the more successful gorrilla that had a slight advange in its genetics and so it is more likely to pass on its benificial traits to the next generation rather than other inferior members of the species.

>>3646207

Yes.

>>3646196

>where does the new information come

yeah, just gonna stop arguing right now and call you out for not EVER having read a single piece of fucking biology related information ever. you are a closed minded mouth breathing sack of shit.

goodbye

>>3646234
i agree.
> can you conduct experiments to test the genetic changes between a lineage of house cats

what is this i don't even

i think i've lost what little faith i have in people understanding both sides of a topic before debating it

What I don't understand is that people like to equate the term "evolution" with the harebrained concept of man springing forth from the womb of a monkey.

>>3645941

It is I, (>>3645906) returned from doing other stuff to continue this discussion.
Sorry for the large gap.

I never said creationists were brainwashed. I merely stated that people interpreted the bible in a certain way in the past to suit their current ideology and the same is happening now.
I never said anyone was brainwashed.

Also, the large backing of evolution is due to the preponderance of evidence for it, specifically cited before your post, and I am sure more evidence came up afterwards.
Also, as someone has since stated, evolution is questioned all of the time. That's why we're not stuck with Darwin's version, while he did get a lot of things correct. There are still differences between modern evolutionary theory and Darwin's initial posit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_evolutionary_synthesis
(Citing wikipedia because all the articles I can find require subscriptions to the science journals)

>>3646207
Yes, actually, you can conduct experiments on the genetic exchanges of housecats if you so desired. We monitor the changes in specific populations ALL THE TIME. There are a number of ways you may wish to do this, but to name one way, microsatellite markers will accomplish this successfully.

>>3645729
i literally cant watch this..i start and then just....i cant

"Should evolution/gravity be taught in schools?"

Whoever decided to ask them that is obviously just pointing out their stupidity on purpose.

Vermont confirmed for non-retarded.

>>3645896
Oh god
The stupid burns
I hate to break it to you but we have so many fossils showing the "transitions" of different evolutionary lineages that the whole "HURRR DUUUR YOUR ONLY EVIDENCE IS MADE UP" argument pretty damn retarded
I'm surprised you haven't mentioned the piltown shit

>darwinsim
>evolutionist

>>3646196
what theory states with intelligence or complexity comes information, a mouse has more genes than we do, and a tube fish the size of your calf has 20 times the number of nucleic acids in their DNA

information is merely changed over time, that's what evolution is, in fact since about 1979 the accepted definition of evolution is "change in the frequency of alleles in the population"

>It's not an "ist" it's science.

>yfw you realise scientIST

A hypothesis that can be verified through experiments becomes a theory. A hypothesis that cannot remains a hypothesis. Evolution is a hypothesis.

>>3647287
but not scientISM

scientist could easily be replaced by "scientor" or something

>>3647334

Um. Nobody calls it Evolutionism.

OP said:

>I'm looking at you evolutionists and creationists.

>It's not an "ist" it's science.

Also.

>yfw DarwinISM

>>3647334
>scientist could easily be replaced by "scientor" or something

Scientologist?

>>3647361

OP is just silly.

Some people just take offense at everything.

>>3645729
Why do we let christians live among us?

Wouldn't it be easier for the animal food industry if we didn't?

>>3647334

I'm SO using scientor from now on!

>pictures Skeletor in a lab coat

>>3647487

Oops, I think broke the thread...

>turn sound off
>masturbate

Thanks, OP.

>Evolution is true
>Adam and Eve never existed
>No Garden of Eden
>No original sin
>No reason for God to save us

And just like that...

>>3646207

You actually can't test that the color of the sky appears the same to different people. You can tell that people are color blind. You can also tell the wavelength of blue light. You can tell that a person's experience of color is the opposite of the typical experience of color, which doesn't say anything about what their subjective experience actually is.

>>3647672
this shit makes me rage so hard, i dont understand how we can be debating whether evolution is a fact or not in the 21st century

>>3645729

nothing is biology makes sense except in the light of evolution

see also:modern evolutionary synthesis

Just a question, a lot of them state that every theory of "how we came to be" should have taught. But, are there any theories other than evolution?

Serious question by the way, not mocking creationism or anything.

>mfw Ms. California won

>>3645881
>He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.

http://www.answering-christianity.com/earth_flat.htm

Wow never realised there was so many brain dead fucks on /sci, guess I need to lurk more.

>Christfags fuck off to /b and cry silently while you fap to traps.

>>3647284
Implying that there hasn't been experiments on evolution, Ignoring 150 years of experimentation is pretty ignorant.

well. evolution is proven on a small scale. as dogs evolved from wolves and shit or we from the apes.

but there are some serious question, which pretty much are the basic questions of evolution. how did life first start? how could dna devolop?

how can the first 4 steps of assimilation consume energy and do not set free.

>>3647831

>dogs from wolves

>us from apes

...

i'm not quite sure why theists keep making god and evolution as these mutually exclusive concepts. they aren't.

evolution is simply another set of simple rules which arise from complex systems (like biology), which in turn arises from simple rules from complex systems ect ect.

at the bottom level is one general equation that developed into reality.

god didn't say "let there be light", he spoke a few symbols and an equivalence

theists have a hard time understanding how profound that is.

>>3645739

Oh god. My sides.
I'm laughing so hard... Holy shit!