O.T. .::THE SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY THREAD::.

[Dirkbaka]

Im living on the bible belt man. Anything scientific that could contradict genesis is a threat. People a few weeks ago here was ready to kill in the name of jesus when they discovered a new species that bridges ape human evolution. Just the mention of scientists finding neanderthal DNA in some humans sparks a harsh defensive negative reaction.

I was reading this thread a few weeks ago, and I saw no one "ready to kill in the name of jesus" nor any "harsh negative reaction".

Painting anyone as some sort of blood-thirsty fanatic simply because they don't fall for evolution, and expresses their views on why they don't, is quite an insult.

I noticed atheists tend to lean towards hurling insults at those who don't subscribe to their view, which makes it appear they are actually the ones who are insecure and predisposed to rage. Perhaps they are really the "harsh...negative" and "ready to kill" folks you speak of.

Wow, this is sad to hear. You are from USA? For some reason, Creationist still have credibility in this country, its amazing to me. I grew up in the middle of Europe and I can tell you, we don't have those people here. Even the most religious pastors and fanatics knows evolution is a fact that can't be disproven. Before I got the Internet, I didn't even know those people still existed in 21s century.

Anyway, this Mars news really exists me. I pray they find extraterrestrial life in my lifetime, even if its single cell organisms, I live for this ****.

Case in point.

But anyway...evolution entirely evades the scientific method, that's why not everyone believes it.

By what standards is it a "fact that can't be disproven?" By religious standards perhaps, since faith is needed to make such a statement? It certainly cannot be proven by the scientific method. Lining up fossils does not prove life sprang from nothing and ended up a human. All it proves is life has endless varieties of species.

Even actual scientists don't go out on a limb to make such declarations of the idea of evolution being "fact that can't be disproven".

I'm curious, who exactly are you praying to, requesting these findings?

I've been polite with you so I will present you with this simple question: Please define scientific method and how it would be used to determine the truth of evolution (or not).

I have to be frank. You may not be insulting anyone directly, but you are completely evasive and never follow through your assertions to their logical conclusion. After writing at great length on these topics I don't believe you have answered that simple question, yet you continue to invoke it as the heart of your thesis that science has no more validity than biblical statements.

Instead of psychologizng anyone any further, just get down to brass tacks and answer that question please. You're the one who keeps inciting this so you should be the one who is capable of putting it to rest.

Add to this my question. Please prove that God made man write the bible centuries ago with the scientific method. Once you do that you win.

[Iron Mantis]

Im living on the bible belt man. Anything scientific that could contradict genesis is a threat. People a few weeks ago here was ready to kill in the name of jesus when they discovered a new species that bridges ape human evolution. Just the mention of scientists finding neanderthal DNA in some humans sparks a harsh defensive negative reaction.

I was reading this thread a few weeks ago, and I saw no one "ready to kill in the name of jesus" nor any "harsh negative reaction".

Painting anyone as some sort of blood-thirsty fanatic simply because they don't fall for evolution, and expresses their views on why they don't, is quite an insult.

I noticed atheists tend to lean towards hurling insults at those who don't subscribe to their view, which makes it appear they are actually the ones who are insecure and predisposed to rage. Perhaps they are really the "harsh...negative" and "ready to kill" folks you speak of.

Wow, this is sad to hear. You are from USA? For some reason, Creationist still have credibility in this country, its amazing to me. I grew up in the middle of Europe and I can tell you, we don't have those people here. Even the most religious pastors and fanatics knows evolution is a fact that can't be disproven. Before I got the Internet, I didn't even know those people still existed in 21s century.

Anyway, this Mars news really exists me. I pray they find extraterrestrial life in my lifetime, even if its single cell organisms, I live for this ****.

Case in point.

But anyway...evolution entirely evades the scientific method, that's why not everyone believes it.

By what standards is it a "fact that can't be disproven?" By religious standards perhaps, since faith is needed to make such a statement? It certainly cannot be proven by the scientific method. Lining up fossils does not prove life sprang from nothing and ended up a human. All it proves is life has endless varieties of species.

Even actual scientists don't go out on a limb to make such declarations of the idea of evolution being "fact that can't be disproven".

I'm curious, who exactly are you praying to, requesting these findings?

So you don't believe in evolution due it evading the scientific method.

But in the same token you believe in the bible which also evades the scientific method. Please tell me how the scientific method can prove that centuries ago God spoke to humans and made them write this book.

This should be good.

You're comparing apples and oranges. I'm holding science to ITS OWN standard, the scientific method.

The Bible is not a scientific idea or discovery, subject to the scientific method, nor is it a science textbook. It is God's message to mankind, and believing in God requires faith.

Science is the opposite; by thier OWN standards, everything is observable, testable, and their theories can make accurate predictions

If science NOW requires faith to believe because it makes claims as fact yet skips the scientific method, then it becomes some sort pseudo-religious belief based on faith.

[Dirkbaka]

I was reading this thread a few weeks ago, and I saw no one "ready to kill in the name of jesus" nor any "harsh negative reaction".

Painting anyone as some sort of blood-thirsty fanatic simply because they don't fall for evolution, and expresses their views on why they don't, is quite an insult.

I noticed atheists tend to lean towards hurling insults at those who don't subscribe to their view, which makes it appear they are actually the ones who are insecure and predisposed to rage. Perhaps they are really the "harsh...negative" and "ready to kill" folks you speak of.

Case in point.

But anyway...evolution entirely evades the scientific method, that's why not everyone believes it.

By what standards is it a "fact that can't be disproven?" By religious standards perhaps, since faith is needed to make such a statement? It certainly cannot be proven by the scientific method. Lining up fossils does not prove life sprang from nothing and ended up a human. All it proves is life has endless varieties of species.

Even actual scientists don't go out on a limb to make such declarations of the idea of evolution being "fact that can't be disproven".

I'm curious, who exactly are you praying to, requesting these findings?

So you don't believe in evolution due it evading the scientific method.

But in the same token you believe in the bible which also evades the scientific method. Please tell me how the scientific method can prove that centuries ago God spoke to humans and made them write this book.

This should be good.

You're comparing apples and oranges. I'm holding science to ITS OWN standard, the scientific method.

The Bible is not a scientific idea or discovery, subject to the scientific method, nor is it a science textbook. It is God's message to mankind, and believing in God requires faith.

Science is the opposite; by thier OWN standards, everything is observable, testable, and their theories can make accurate predictions

If science NOW requires faith to believe because it makes claims as fact yet skips the scientific method, then it becomes some sort pseudo-religious belief based on faith.

I really don't get where you come off saying that evolution evades the scientific method.

Do you even understand the scientific method? It is not linear, it is circular.

You make hypothesis, you gather data, you test the data, then if the data backs up your hypothesis you have a theory. BUT IT DOESN'T END THERE. And that is where you keep getting hung up.

The scientific method doesn't say that once data backs up your hypothesis you stop and you have proven your hypothesis. NO.

It says that, you gather more and more data to make sure the data doesn't conflict with your theory.

The scientific method is never ending. It knows that what you believe in 1990 may be proven wrong in 2010 because of new data.

Science is flexible enough to take new data into account and say "what i thought was right is actually wrong, so let us come up with a new theory of what is right based on this new data".

That is something religion has a hard time with.

[Clyde_Style]

I was reading this thread a few weeks ago, and I saw no one "ready to kill in the name of jesus" nor any "harsh negative reaction".

Painting anyone as some sort of blood-thirsty fanatic simply because they don't fall for evolution, and expresses their views on why they don't, is quite an insult.

I noticed atheists tend to lean towards hurling insults at those who don't subscribe to their view, which makes it appear they are actually the ones who are insecure and predisposed to rage. Perhaps they are really the "harsh...negative" and "ready to kill" folks you speak of.

Case in point.

But anyway...evolution entirely evades the scientific method, that's why not everyone believes it.

By what standards is it a "fact that can't be disproven?" By religious standards perhaps, since faith is needed to make such a statement? It certainly cannot be proven by the scientific method. Lining up fossils does not prove life sprang from nothing and ended up a human. All it proves is life has endless varieties of species.

Even actual scientists don't go out on a limb to make such declarations of the idea of evolution being "fact that can't be disproven".

I'm curious, who exactly are you praying to, requesting these findings?

I've been polite with you so I will present you with this simple question: Please define scientific method and how it would be used to determine the truth of evolution (or not).

I have to be frank. You may not be insulting anyone directly, but you are completely evasive and never follow through your assertions to their logical conclusion. After writing at great length on these topics I don't believe you have answered that simple question, yet you continue to invoke it as the heart of your thesis that science has no more validity than biblical statements.

Instead of psychologizng anyone any further, just get down to brass tacks and answer that question please. You're the one who keeps inciting this so you should be the one who is capable of putting it to rest.

Add to this my question. Please prove that God made man write the bible centuries ago with the scientific method. Once you do that you win.

That is not a viable question. Anyone can assert they received guidance from non-human sources to carry out an objective, but you cannot use scientific method to prove or disprove it. And you certainly can't do it from the viewpoint of the present examining historical record. What scholars can do and have done is determine to some degree what portions of the old testament were written by which groups and at roughly what time. But that is another subject entirely.

Myself, I don't believe scientific method can explain everything about existence and I don't believe it ever will do so in its entirety simply because of what I've already expressed: Experience is personal and direct and cannot be atomized into quantified data.

I do believe entities exist, but I find mono-theism and the notion of ONE GOD to be fairly ludicrous and not something I feel any desire to debate. It is the comic book version of reality mankind has turned into a crutch for millenia. Christianity and Islam are both implausible at their cores. Jesus was a yogi. He wandered the Far East and met Buddhas. What he brought back to the desert was actual miracles, but the cultures that absorbed his influence turned it into testaments that one divine force rules our world. It is just absurd.

But then again, I accept some will take my statements that non-carbon life forms do exist and there are sentient forces with their own intentions, some good and some evil, that do exist in dimensions that overlap our own as rubbish.

I merely believe in what I've seen and understood to be existing and I'm not driven by a need for an authority figure to put it all into a tidy cosmic order. The cosmos is vast, its cruel and indifferent, it has multiple laws of physics operating simultaneously and the idea than a single God constructed by the imagination of earthlings created all of the galaxies trivializes the vastness of space and time.

The "Mind of God" is sometimes invoked as the creation of the universe in that the big bang was in effect God waking up and manifesting its own self into material form. This is the real root of genesis mythologies, not images of hokey bearded man and his son spreading the gospel. And all of this stuff preceded biblical record by thousands of years in the Far East. Western Civ is a cut and paste mash-up of the original mystical insights generated in earlier times in India and Asia. Western Civ imposed authority hierarchies it could control with Mr. God at the top and the priestly caste as the middle men. And this is why Rome pimped Christianity, because it was the ultimate crowd control mechanism.

Scientific method is not beholden to any of this cultural baggage.

[Iron Mantis]

Im living on the bible belt man. Anything scientific that could contradict genesis is a threat. People a few weeks ago here was ready to kill in the name of jesus when they discovered a new species that bridges ape human evolution. Just the mention of scientists finding neanderthal DNA in some humans sparks a harsh defensive negative reaction.

I was reading this thread a few weeks ago, and I saw no one "ready to kill in the name of jesus" nor any "harsh negative reaction".

Painting anyone as some sort of blood-thirsty fanatic simply because they don't fall for evolution, and expresses their views on why they don't, is quite an insult.

I noticed atheists tend to lean towards hurling insults at those who don't subscribe to their view, which makes it appear they are actually the ones who are insecure and predisposed to rage. Perhaps they are really the "harsh...negative" and "ready to kill" folks you speak of.

Wow, this is sad to hear. You are from USA? For some reason, Creationist still have credibility in this country, its amazing to me. I grew up in the middle of Europe and I can tell you, we don't have those people here. Even the most religious pastors and fanatics knows evolution is a fact that can't be disproven. Before I got the Internet, I didn't even know those people still existed in 21s century.

Anyway, this Mars news really exists me. I pray they find extraterrestrial life in my lifetime, even if its single cell organisms, I live for this ****.

Case in point.

But anyway...evolution entirely evades the scientific method, that's why not everyone believes it.

By what standards is it a "fact that can't be disproven?" By religious standards perhaps, since faith is needed to make such a statement? It certainly cannot be proven by the scientific method. Lining up fossils does not prove life sprang from nothing and ended up a human. All it proves is life has endless varieties of species.

Even actual scientists don't go out on a limb to make such declarations of the idea of evolution being "fact that can't be disproven".

I'm curious, who exactly are you praying to, requesting these findings?

]

How exactly does the theory of Evolution evades scientific method? Really curious to know. From my understanding it falls under scientific method very well.

Theory of Evolution is not only proven, it is proven a long time ago. We not only have indisputable evidence, we as human beings were able to actually documented evolution of other species. Peppered moth for example,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution

I'm reading a link to peppered moth adaption.

There's no observation of macroevolution in action. I want to see some animals transforming into entirely different ones.

[UcanUwill]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y12IARuz2rY[/youtube]

[UcanUwill]

Anyway, anyone familiar with Vsauce? Its a great youtube channel, I think its appropriate for this thread.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDrBIKOR01c[/youtube]

[Clyde_Style]

Anyway, anyone familiar with Vsauce? Its a great youtube channel, I think its appropriate for this thread.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDrBIKOR01c[/youtube]

This was a funny comment on that YouTube page:

Born too late to explore the earth.
Born too early to explore space.
Born right on time to explore memes.

[KnickFan33]

I was reading this thread a few weeks ago, and I saw no one "ready to kill in the name of jesus" nor any "harsh negative reaction".

Painting anyone as some sort of blood-thirsty fanatic simply because they don't fall for evolution, and expresses their views on why they don't, is quite an insult.

I noticed atheists tend to lean towards hurling insults at those who don't subscribe to their view, which makes it appear they are actually the ones who are insecure and predisposed to rage. Perhaps they are really the "harsh...negative" and "ready to kill" folks you speak of.

Case in point.

But anyway...evolution entirely evades the scientific method, that's why not everyone believes it.

By what standards is it a "fact that can't be disproven?" By religious standards perhaps, since faith is needed to make such a statement? It certainly cannot be proven by the scientific method. Lining up fossils does not prove life sprang from nothing and ended up a human. All it proves is life has endless varieties of species.

Even actual scientists don't go out on a limb to make such declarations of the idea of evolution being "fact that can't be disproven".

I'm curious, who exactly are you praying to, requesting these findings?

]

How exactly does the theory of Evolution evades scientific method? Really curious to know. From my understanding it falls under scientific method very well.

Theory of Evolution is not only proven, it is proven a long time ago. We not only have indisputable evidence, we as human beings were able to actually documented evolution of other species. Peppered moth for example,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution

I'm reading a link to peppered moth adaption.

There's no observation of macroevolution in action. I want to see some animals transforming into entirely different ones.

Back to this conversation eh?

This time we'll definitely reach a consensus.

[Iron Mantis]

]

How exactly does the theory of Evolution evades scientific method? Really curious to know. From my understanding it falls under scientific method very well.

Theory of Evolution is not only proven, it is proven a long time ago. We not only have indisputable evidence, we as human beings were able to actually documented evolution of other species. Peppered moth for example,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution

I'm reading a link to peppered moth adaption.

There's no observation of macroevolution in action. I want to see some animals transforming into entirely different ones.

Back to this conversation eh?

This time we'll definitely reach a consensus.

[Iron Mantis]

Anyway, anyone familiar with Vsauce? Its a great youtube channel, I think its appropriate for this thread.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDrBIKOR01c[/youtube]

That vid quality tho

Think its time to upgrade my TV

[KnickFan33]

WATER ON MARS

Really stoked about the news.

Here's a hypothetical. Say microorganisms are found and they are similar in composition to those on earth (carbon based). Would you say that favors they hypothesis of panspermia? Or would you say that it might just mean that carbon based lifeforms are simply an inevitability given the presence of water?

[Clyde_Style]

WATER ON MARS

Really stoked about the news.

Here's a hypothetical. Say microorganisms are found and they are similar in composition to those on earth (carbon based). Would you say that favors they hypothesis of panspermia? Or would you say that it might just mean that carbon based lifeforms are simply an inevitability given the presence of water?

I've never held a particularly strong emphasis in the value of either scenario, i.e. earth being fully evolved internally or if it were seeded by other organisms.

By default, even on a base elemental level, everything is stardust so the earth is a byproduct of something else. For this alone, you have to assume elemental associations will be found on other planets. That is not entirely significant as far as I know so far.

I do think there probably already enough known facts about our biosphere to conclude most carbon-based lifeforms require certain conditions to produce highly sentient beings. That the earth has life forms that exist in inhospitable conditions in deep water or volcanoes and under extreme climatic conditions means life can probably exist in scenarios we haven't encountered yet, but they will still likely require environmental factors like the moisture (not really a new discovery) and its behavior (this is what the new findings are really about) found on Mars.

By extrapolation, the implications of H2O probably only mean there is moisture that under certain climatic conditions and with certain elemental interactions could produce the framework for organisms to evolve into more complex beings. The real hunt now is for single cell organisms. If they are found, but dead, it will probably mean things didn't kickstart beyond the basic starting point. If they are found, but alive, it means life could evolve further under the right conditions.

But does it mean anything else? Likely not. Some are into ancient alien theories and they could say Mars and Earth were seeded by other civilizations and Earth hit the jackpot. There are many theories about this stuff, including the possible existence of advanced human technologies that were lost to war and previous genocides, which some will ascribe to visitors and not simply human ingenuity.

[TheBigBoss]

Im living on the bible belt man. Anything scientific that could contradict genesis is a threat. People a few weeks ago here was ready to kill in the name of jesus when they discovered a new species that bridges ape human evolution. Just the mention of scientists finding neanderthal DNA in some humans sparks a harsh defensive negative reaction.

Wow, this is sad to hear. You are from USA? For some reason, Creationist still have credibility in this country, its amazing to me. I grew up in the middle of Europe and I can tell you, we don't have those people here. Even the most religious pastors and fanatics knows evolution is a fact that can't be disproven. Before I got the Internet, I didn't even know those people still existed in 21s century.

Anyway, this Mars news really exists me. I pray they find extraterrestrial life in my lifetime, even if its single cell organisms, I live for this ****.

It'd be funny if it weren't so disturbing with the extreme side. There's a Vice episode exploring the droughts in Texas where rather than acknowledge man-made climate change people are creating prayer circles to ask God to bless them with rain.

This water discovery is pretty damned major. It's another sign that there must be life out there and I think it pushes us further in the direction of a manned mission to Mars in our lifetimes.

So what happens 1st, Knicks championship or manned mission to Mars? Before you answer keep in mind that if I asked you back in 73 what would happen 1st, a Knicks championship or America''s 1st black president, you probably would have said Knicks championship without a doubt.

[Clyde_Style]

Wow, this is sad to hear. You are from USA? For some reason, Creationist still have credibility in this country, its amazing to me. I grew up in the middle of Europe and I can tell you, we don't have those people here. Even the most religious pastors and fanatics knows evolution is a fact that can't be disproven. Before I got the Internet, I didn't even know those people still existed in 21s century.

Anyway, this Mars news really exists me. I pray they find extraterrestrial life in my lifetime, even if its single cell organisms, I live for this ****.

It'd be funny if it weren't so disturbing with the extreme side. There's a Vice episode exploring the droughts in Texas where rather than acknowledge man-made climate change people are creating prayer circles to ask God to bless them with rain.

This water discovery is pretty damned major. It's another sign that there must be life out there and I think it pushes us further in the direction of a manned mission to Mars in our lifetimes.

So what happens 1st, Knicks championship or manned mission to Mars? Before you answer keep in mind that if I asked you back in 73 what would happen 1st, a Knicks championship or America''s 1st black president, you probably would have said Knicks championship without a doubt.

Knicks in 2018

Black Man on Mars 2020

[Deeeez Knicks]

The water/ice cycle of comets is also pretty interesting.

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Rosetta/Rosetta_reveals_comet_s_water-ice_cycle

“We found a mechanism that replenishes the surface of the comet with fresh ice at every rotation: this keeps the comet ‘alive’,” says Maria Cristina De Sanctis from INAF-IAPS in Rome, Italy, lead author of the study.


The team studied a set of data taken in September 2014, concentrating on a one square km region on the comet’s neck. At the time, the comet was about 500 million km from the Sun and the neck was one of the most active areas.

As the comet rotates, taking just over 12 hours to complete a full revolution, the various regions undergo different illumination.

“We saw the tell-tale signature of water ice in the spectra of the study region but only when certain portions were cast in shadow,” says Maria Cristina.

“Conversely, when the Sun was shining on these regions, the ice was gone. This indicates a cyclical behaviour of water ice during each comet rotation.”

The data suggest that water ice on and a few centimetres below the surface ‘sublimates’ when illuminated by sunlight, turning it into gas that then flows away from the comet. Then, as the comet rotates and the same region falls into darkness, the surface rapidly cools again.

[Iron Mantis]

So you don't believe in evolution due it evading the scientific method.

But in the same token you believe in the bible which also evades the scientific method. Please tell me how the scientific method can prove that centuries ago God spoke to humans and made them write this book.

This should be good.

You're comparing apples and oranges. I'm holding science to ITS OWN standard, the scientific method.

The Bible is not a scientific idea or discovery, subject to the scientific method, nor is it a science textbook. It is God's message to mankind, and believing in God requires faith.

Science is the opposite; by thier OWN standards, everything is observable, testable, and their theories can make accurate predictions

If science NOW requires faith to believe because it makes claims as fact yet skips the scientific method, then it becomes some sort pseudo-religious belief based on faith.

I really don't get where you come off saying that evolution evades the scientific method.

Do you even understand the scientific method? It is not linear, it is circular.

You make hypothesis, you gather data, you test the data, then if the data backs up your hypothesis you have a theory. BUT IT DOESN'T END THERE. And that is where you keep getting hung up.

The scientific method doesn't say that once data backs up your hypothesis you stop and you have proven your hypothesis. NO.

It says that, you gather more and more data to make sure the data doesn't conflict with your theory.

The scientific method is never ending. It knows that what you believe in 1990 may be proven wrong in 2010 because of new data.

Science is flexible enough to take new data into account and say "what i thought was right is actually wrong, so let us come up with a new theory of what is right based on this new data".

That is something religion has a hard time with.

I understand clear and well how the scientific method works.

I like this quote:

“Replication of methods and results is my favorite step in the scientific method," Moshe Pritsker, a former post-doctoral researcher at Harvard Medical School and CEO of JoVE, told Live Science. "The reproducibility of published experiments is the foundation of science. No reproducibility – no science."

No scientist has seen, reproduced, or accurately predicted the process of macroevolution at work. They have observed small-scale changes and adaptations within the boundaries of a species, found fossils of various different creatures, and that's it.

That's not "good science" or convincing evidence at all saying it's factual that a pool of formaldehyde eventually ended up alive, "quickly"(by evolutionary standards) branching off into endless, completely different, varieties of creatures during the Cambrian explosion, then became a fully functioning human over any "billions of years", when there's no observations at all of species transforming, or even real transitional fossils to support the jump.

Then saying that something completely non-observable is a "fact", NOT requiring faith, is something religion has a hard time with.

[Dirkbaka]

You're comparing apples and oranges. I'm holding science to ITS OWN standard, the scientific method.

The Bible is not a scientific idea or discovery, subject to the scientific method, nor is it a science textbook. It is God's message to mankind, and believing in God requires faith.

Science is the opposite; by thier OWN standards, everything is observable, testable, and their theories can make accurate predictions

If science NOW requires faith to believe because it makes claims as fact yet skips the scientific method, then it becomes some sort pseudo-religious belief based on faith.

I really don't get where you come off saying that evolution evades the scientific method.

Do you even understand the scientific method? It is not linear, it is circular.

You make hypothesis, you gather data, you test the data, then if the data backs up your hypothesis you have a theory. BUT IT DOESN'T END THERE. And that is where you keep getting hung up.

The scientific method doesn't say that once data backs up your hypothesis you stop and you have proven your hypothesis. NO.

It says that, you gather more and more data to make sure the data doesn't conflict with your theory.

The scientific method is never ending. It knows that what you believe in 1990 may be proven wrong in 2010 because of new data.

Science is flexible enough to take new data into account and say "what i thought was right is actually wrong, so let us come up with a new theory of what is right based on this new data".

That is something religion has a hard time with.

I understand clear and well how the scientific method works.

I like this quote:

“Replication of methods and results is my favorite step in the scientific method," Moshe Pritsker, a former post-doctoral researcher at Harvard Medical School and CEO of JoVE, told Live Science. "The reproducibility of published experiments is the foundation of science. No reproducibility – no science."

No scientist has seen, reproduced, or accurately predicted the process of macroevolution at work. They have observed small-scale changes and adaptations within the boundaries of a species, found fossils of various different creatures, and that's it.

That's not "good science" or convincing evidence at all saying it's factual that a pool of formaldehyde eventually ended up alive, "quickly"(by evolutionary standards) branching off into endless, completely different, varieties of creatures during the Cambrian explosion, then became a fully functioning human over any "billions of years", when there's no observations at all of species transforming, or even real transitional fossils to support the jump.

Then saying that something completely non-observable is a "fact", NOT requiring faith, is something religion has a hard time with.

What you are asking for as proof is an impossibility and you know it. Since evolution takes millions of years to occur. You can't test this in a lab like you could other things. You can't get a monkey then wait for it 5 years and boom a human.

We are finding evidence of different species evolving from one another.

But what you are asking for which is for this to be observed is impossible.

I still don't understand what your point is to be quite honest. That because you can't test this in a lab it proves that religion= correct, science=wrong?

[Clyde_Style]

You're comparing apples and oranges. I'm holding science to ITS OWN standard, the scientific method.

The Bible is not a scientific idea or discovery, subject to the scientific method, nor is it a science textbook. It is God's message to mankind, and believing in God requires faith.

Science is the opposite; by thier OWN standards, everything is observable, testable, and their theories can make accurate predictions

If science NOW requires faith to believe because it makes claims as fact yet skips the scientific method, then it becomes some sort pseudo-religious belief based on faith.

I really don't get where you come off saying that evolution evades the scientific method.

Do you even understand the scientific method? It is not linear, it is circular.

You make hypothesis, you gather data, you test the data, then if the data backs up your hypothesis you have a theory. BUT IT DOESN'T END THERE. And that is where you keep getting hung up.

The scientific method doesn't say that once data backs up your hypothesis you stop and you have proven your hypothesis. NO.

It says that, you gather more and more data to make sure the data doesn't conflict with your theory.

The scientific method is never ending. It knows that what you believe in 1990 may be proven wrong in 2010 because of new data.

Science is flexible enough to take new data into account and say "what i thought was right is actually wrong, so let us come up with a new theory of what is right based on this new data".

That is something religion has a hard time with.

I understand clear and well how the scientific method works.

I like this quote:

“Replication of methods and results is my favorite step in the scientific method," Moshe Pritsker, a former post-doctoral researcher at Harvard Medical School and CEO of JoVE, told Live Science. "The reproducibility of published experiments is the foundation of science. No reproducibility – no science."

No scientist has seen, reproduced, or accurately predicted the process of macroevolution at work. They have observed small-scale changes and adaptations within the boundaries of a species, found fossils of various different creatures, and that's it.

That's not "good science" or convincing evidence at all saying it's factual that a pool of formaldehyde eventually ended up alive, "quickly"(by evolutionary standards) branching off into endless, completely different, varieties of creatures during the Cambrian explosion, then became a fully functioning human over any "billions of years", when there's no observations at all of species transforming, or even real transitional fossils to support the jump.

Then saying that something completely non-observable is a "fact", NOT requiring faith, is something religion has a hard time with.

Alright, that's just awful. You dodged my post completely. You won't explain what scientific method is, yet you have the gall to say because no one has reproduced evolutionary phenomena, there is no way to validate it? You have got to be kidding. I'm giving up on discussing science or religion with you and I'll stick to hoops where I can maintain a respectful manner, because I don't have the patience to deal matters of time scale or genomes with you when you're so evasive and dismissive of basic evidence. Your take on science is not taking you into a realm of understanding and you talk about scientific method with not a shred of interest in empiricism. You have your point of view and you will continue to retrofit everything to fit your foregone, faith-based conclusions. I don't mind if you want to do that, but I do find your attempts to discredit others becoming increasingly cheap and misguided.

[kane2021]

Im living on the bible belt man. Anything scientific that could contradict genesis is a threat. People a few weeks ago here was ready to kill in the name of jesus when they discovered a new species that bridges ape human evolution. Just the mention of scientists finding neanderthal DNA in some humans sparks a harsh defensive negative reaction.

I was reading this thread a few weeks ago, and I saw no one "ready to kill in the name of jesus" nor any "harsh negative reaction".

Painting anyone as some sort of blood-thirsty fanatic simply because they don't fall for evolution, and expresses their views on why they don't, is quite an insult.

I noticed atheists tend to lean towards hurling insults at those who don't subscribe to their view, which makes it appear they are actually the ones who are insecure and predisposed to rage. Perhaps they are really the "harsh...negative" and "ready to kill" folks you speak of.

Wow, this is sad to hear. You are from USA? For some reason, Creationist still have credibility in this country, its amazing to me. I grew up in the middle of Europe and I can tell you, we don't have those people here. Even the most religious pastors and fanatics knows evolution is a fact that can't be disproven. Before I got the Internet, I didn't even know those people still existed in 21s century.

Anyway, this Mars news really exists me. I pray they find extraterrestrial life in my lifetime, even if its single cell organisms, I live for this ****.

Case in point.

But anyway...evolution entirely evades the scientific method, that's why not everyone believes it.

By what standards is it a "fact that can't be disproven?" By religious standards perhaps, since faith is needed to make such a statement? It certainly cannot be proven by the scientific method. Lining up fossils does not prove life sprang from nothing and ended up a human. All it proves is life has endless varieties of species.

Even actual scientists don't go out on a limb to make such declarations of the idea of evolution being "fact that can't be disproven".

I'm curious, who exactly are you praying to, requesting these findings?

I wasnt talking about this thread. I didnt check this thread until this past weekend about the mars news.

Im talking about where im living right now. And actual conversations with people. The "bible belt" is an accepted term used in and to describe the south. More specifically the carolinas. Where you keep your bible on the dash board and fly your rebel flag on the back of your pickup truck.

And this kinda makes my point too. Because I didnt bring up evolution with these folks or nothing. Didnt bring religion into it. They found the subject threatening on the drop of a dime. They found the whole mars thing threatening. When THEY,.... defensively brought religion into the subject. And tried to shut it down,.... it finally dawned on me why they were so upset.

And yeah. Its laugh out loud funny until you get categorized. Like being called an atheist. Something to my knowledge im not. And the name calling starts. The threats that sudden death will strike. And you will be tortured forever in hell. Then the prayers start.

Yes its really like that. If you want proof, you can find easily. I can even point you in the right direction.

Here's another example. This weekends blood moon and eclipse. The bible verses to back that this signifies the end where in full swing. Yes,.. the end of the world was this weekend.

Bro I **** you not. We had a drought. No rain for weeks. This whole weekend and still now,... its rained and been cloudy. No one saw the blood moon here. God brought the rain storms and clouds. Gave us the rain we needed and blocked the blood moon with the clouds. And thats why we are still here today. Thats why the world didnt end this weekend.

The whole world is still here right now, because it rained on "the bible belt". In the south. Thats how important people are here. How important this land is. And more proof that prayer works and there is a god.

Blows my mind. And I cant say nothing. Free speech? Common sense? No way. Im a yankee. A hispanic. A smart ass from the north. I must know my place and keep my mouth shut and appreciate by the way of god that im allowed to be here in the south.

Never once have I ever challenged anyones belief. Just the act of thinking is a threat to the way of faith. And im not from here. So i better watch my step,... and not think.

Of course I dont see it that way. Dont matter how many times they arrest me.