Believe in science & ethics
-
i think the common ground now is to be long Nikkei 225 ! ha ha!
btw, 70% of a human body is water and 70% of earth's surface is also water, a coincidental fact which is much over-looked by people.
for a monkey, its water content is less than 70% -
You seem to be confused about something.Originally posted by Kachui:I suppose you believe in Evolution...that life begins from an accidental mix of atoms and molecules...that somehow evolved into single cell life form and progressed to become complex organisms and finally fish, mammals, and us...
Now...have scientists actually found solid proof of this Theory of Evolution? Even Darwin admitted it was just a hyphothesis...and till today, it has yet to be proven to be absolutely true...there are simply too many holes in the theory. But many just accepted it to be true because it is in the science textbooks.
So don't you sit up there with your pseudo-intelletual snobbishness and label Christians "piteous" when you yourself does not really understand the science that you worship.
No, your lame argument did not affect my belief. You thin too highly of yourself.
"theory" means "the explanation of"
"The Theory of Evolution" means "The Explanation of Evolution"
Just like "The Theory of Relativity" means "The Explanation of Relativity"
It does not say anything about the truth or falsehood about Evolution or Relativity.
The truth or falsehood is confirmed by looking at the "evidence" the "observations" the "experiments" and the "Facts"
So when you observe a "fact" (interplanetary/interstellar movements) as predicted by the Theory of Relativity, you then say that the Theory of Relativity is confirmed by that fact (and many other facts).
In the case of the Theory of Evolution, it is similarly confirmed by many "facts" - observations as predicted by the theory.
You need not take a position of EVOLUTION vs Christianity. European Christians, for example, have no problems accepting The Theory of Evolution.
It is better for you to change the interpretation of whatever it is you think the Bible says. The Bible is open to interpretation and you must align your interpretations with the latest scientific findings.
Edited to add... you also need not get agitated when people try to debunk Christianity by saying that the creation story is in conflict with the Theory of Evolution. It is in conflict depending on the interpretation of the Bible only. -
I wonder who started it first. While the rest are contributing to this thread, someone who does not have the guts to admit he knows nothing about Science, appears and starts insulting those who see that Science is limited.Originally posted by PRP:Don't be personal,pls.Don't be insulting also.
Is there superstitious belief in S'pore?
Till now, he hasn't proven himself to know anything about Science, and all he offers are vague arguments.
Yes, there is superstitious belief in Singapore. Do you step on burnt incense deliberately? So what is your point? -
The monkey is a failure.Originally posted by (human):He who knows best knows how little he knows. -Thomas jefferson
Doesn't even have knowledge of famous words, and creates his own -
-
Andrew has made much sense but you think he doesn't know anything about science.This is the interesting result of the debates!!!!Originally posted by soul_rage:I wonder who started it first. While the rest are contributing to this thread, someone who does not have the guts to admit he knows nothing about Science, appears and starts insulting those who see that Science is limited.
Till now, he hasn't proven himself to know anything about Science, and all he offers are vague arguments.
Yes, there is superstitious belief in Singapore. Do you step on burnt incense deliberately? So what is your point?
Burning 'hell money' is a superstiition. -
If I were pseudo-intellectual,what are u?Originally posted by Kachui:I suppose you believe in Evolution...that life begins from an accidental mix of atoms and molecules...that somehow evolved into single cell life form and progressed to become complex organisms and finally fish, mammals, and us...
Now...have scientists actually found solid proof of this Theory of Evolution? Even Darwin admitted it was just a hyphothesis...and till today, it has yet to be proven to be absolutely true...there are simply too many holes in the theory. But many just accepted it to be true because it is in the science textbooks.
So don't you sit up there with your pseudo-intelletual snobbishness and label Christians "piteous" when you yourself does not really understand the science that you worship.
No, your lame argument did not affect my belief. You thin too highly of yourself.
If u believe god created the world is true,u have the right to believe but majority of the ppl don't. -
Hi Andrew, I am not trying to bring Evolution Vs Christianity debate into this thread. That was not my intention. The arguments between these two factions can be found all over the net, both giving sound arguments; I have my own beliefs and I respect others' beliefs. I am not agitated in anyway that there are people trying to debunk Christianity or all religions. My response was due to the pompous pseudo-intellectual who has not contributed anything to this thread and who seemed to be riding on your coat-tail, labelling Christians as "piteous" and arrogantly warned us that what he was about to write will shake our belief. I hate people who make pompous and arrogant claims without substance.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:You seem to be confused about something.
"theory" means "the explanation of"
"The Theory of Evolution" means "The Explanation of Evolution"
Just like "The Theory of Relativity" means "The Explanation of Relativity"
It does not say anything about the truth or falsehood about Evolution or Relativity.
The truth or falsehood is confirmed by looking at the "evidence" the "observations" the "experiments" and the "Facts"
So when you observe a "fact" (interplanetary/interstellar movements) as predicted by the Theory of Relativity, you then say that the Theory of Relativity is confirmed by that fact (and many other facts).
In the case of the Theory of Evolution, it is similarly confirmed by many "facts" - observations as predicted by the theory.
You need not take a position of EVOLUTION vs Christianity. European Christians, for example, have no problems accepting The Theory of Evolution.
It is better for you to change the interpretation of whatever it is you think the Bible says. The Bible is open to interpretation and you must align your interpretations with the latest scientific findings.
Edited to add... you also need not get agitated when people try to debunk Christianity by saying that the creation story is in conflict with the Theory of Evolution. It is in conflict depending on the interpretation of the Bible only. -
I never call myself an intellectual. But from your writing, you seemed to think yourself as one.Originally posted by PRP:If I were pseudo-intellectual,what are u?
If u believe god created the world is true,u have the right to believe but majority of the ppl don't.
You stated that majority of the people do not believe that God created the world? What is your point?
By the way, you have done a survey or something to come to that conclusion? And so what if the majority of the people do not believe that God created the world; does that mean what the majority believe in must be correct? -
Hi, my main intention was just to clarify the meaning of "Theory" in "Theory of Evolution" and "Theory of Gravity" and so onOriginally posted by Kachui:Hi Andrew, I am not trying to bring Evolution Vs Christianity debate into this thread. That was not my intention. The arguments between these two factions can be found all over the net, both giving sound arguments; I have my own beliefs and I respect others' beliefs. I am not agitated in anyway that there are people trying to debunk Christianity or all religions. My response was due to the pompous pseudo-intellectual who has not contributed anything to this thread and who seemed to be riding on your coat-tail, labelling Christians as "piteous" and arrogantly warned us that what he was about to write will shake our belief. I hate people who make pompous and arrogant claims without substance.
-
Noted.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Hi, my main intention was just to clarify the meaning of "Theory" in "Theory of Evolution" and "Theory of Gravity" and so on
This is what I get from Wikipedia for the definition of "Theory":
The word theory has a number of distinct meanings in different fields of knowledge, depending on their methodologies and the context of discussion.
In common usage, people often use the word theory to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them. In this usage, the word is synonymous with hypothesis. This common usage of theory leads to the common but misguided statement "It's not a fact, it's only a theory."
In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behaviour are Newton's theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and general relativity.
So, I guess, it is very easy for a layperson like me to be confused with the term in science. But still, on the note of Evolution, I have been prowling the net on the contentions between the creationists and evlutionists, and found that there are a lot of arguments from both sides. Interesting to note that In the US, according to a survey published in Nature in 1997, four out of 10 scientists believe in God. Just over 45% said they did not believe, and 14.5% described themselves as doubters or agnostics.
Here is one interesting read for non-scientist:
http://www.newgeology.us/presentation32.html -
one stock just doubled today. wow! go go go!
hmm...sorry. still talking to a boogie wonderland monkey? ha ha! -
So what does he know about Science?Originally posted by PRP:Andrew has made much sense but you think he doesn't know anything about science.This is the interesting result of the debates!!!!
Burning 'hell money' is a superstiition.
And what do you know about Science?
I see you contributing one-liners most of the time.
And will you step over a pile of burnt hell money? -
Actually, scientists and personnel working in the astronomy portion of Science many believe that there is God.Originally posted by Kachui:Noted.
This is what I get from Wikipedia for the definition of "Theory":
The word theory has a number of distinct meanings in different fields of knowledge, depending on their methodologies and the context of discussion.
In common usage, people often use the word theory to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them. In this usage, the word is synonymous with hypothesis. This common usage of theory leads to the common but misguided statement "It's not a fact, it's only a theory."
In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behaviour are Newton's theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and general relativity.
So, I guess, it is very easy for a layperson like me to be confused with the term in science. But still, on the note of Evolution, I have been prowling the net on the contentions between the creationists and evlutionists, and found that there are a lot of arguments from both sides. Interesting to note that In the US, according to a survey published in Nature in 1997, four out of 10 scientists believe in God. Just over 45% said they did not believe, and 14.5% described themselves as doubters or agnostics.
Here is one interesting read for non-scientist:
http://www.newgeology.us/presentation32.html
It was said that once you see what Space really is, Science becomes small and insignificant in the vastness of the universe, and that we human beings think too much of ourselves. -
actually, i do have a question. If God created man, why did he make man to be so lonely on one planet called Earth? What is the universe for?Originally posted by soul_rage:Actually, scientists and personnel working in the astronomy portion of Science many believe that there is God.
It was said that once you see what Space really is, Science becomes small and insignificant in the vastness of the universe, and that we human beings think too much of ourselves.
At the moment, our science is unable to bring us beyond the boundary of the solar system which is itself a small peanut within a galaxy which is itself a small peanut within the universe and our universe might not be the only universe!
Most likely, mankind disappears before it can fully understand the universe. man gets extinct before our sun, and our sun disappears before the galaxy.
we are all PEANUTS ^ 3 !!! Ha Ha !! Laugh it away man and worry not so much !! Buy Nikkei 225 !! -
can someone tell me where i can adopt a boogie wonderland monkey as my pet? i think i should do something good back for nature.
-
There is another confusion, if you don't mind, that I would like to clear up.Originally posted by Kachui:
Scientists, or scientific people do not accept ANYTHING as TRUTH. Christians take the bible as THE TRUTH, THE WORD OF GODS, THE INFALLIBLE WISDOM and so you are confused.
You think that scientific people are like Christians and take Evolution Theory like Christians take the bible, as infallible truth.
You have to think outside of yourself in order to understand how scientific people think.
When people of science look at evolution, they do not take EVOLUTION as THE WAY, THE TRUTH and THE LIFE. They take evolution as, the best alternative explanation around, until something better comes along.
You might say that the bible has the best alternative explanation.
To scientific people, that is not acceptable. Why? Is it because it does not make sense? Is it because it is wrong? Is it because it is a lie?
No. It is simply not proven.
You see, scientific people will throw away Darwin's Theory of Evolution the minute something better comes along.
They are fair, they will embrace the biblical version of events the minute Christians come up with the evidence and proof.
In the same way, people "discarded" Newtonian Theory of Gravity where super large (inter-stellar) bodies are concerned. They now go with Einstein's Theory of Relativity.
There is no possibility of people accepting the biblical version unless people can come up with the proof and evidence that backs up the biblical version.
Without the proof and evidence, then who is to say that the Hindu or the Buddhist versions are not the correct versions?
If you want people to discard the Theory of Evolution, you (meaning those capable of doing so) have to come up good evidence and proof that The Theory of xxxxxx makes more sense than the Theory of Evolution. -
The way this monkey say with so much absoluteness in his words, he is saying,Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:When people of science look at evolution, they do not take EVOLUTION as THE WAY, THE TRUTH and THE LIFE. They take evolution as, the best alternative explanation around, until something better comes along.
You might say that the bible has the best alternative explanation.
To scientific people, that is not acceptable. Why? Is it because it does not make sense? Is it because it is wrong? Is it because it is a lie?
No. It is simply not proven.
They are fair, they will embrace the biblical version of events the minute Christians come up with the evidence and proof.
All scientists are non-christians, since people of Science does not accept the bible.
But is that the case? -
Probably the main contention between Science and the Bible, is how life come to be; Science says Evolution (until a better theory comes around), Bible says Intelligent design.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:There is another confusion, if you don't mind, that I would like to clear up.
Scientists, or scientific people do not accept ANYTHING as TRUTH. Christians take the bible as THE TRUTH, THE WORD OF GODS, THE INFALLIBLE WISDOM and so you are confused.
You think that scientific people are like Christians and take Evolution Theory like Christians take the bible, as infallible truth.
You have to think outside of yourself in order to understand how scientific people think.
When people of science look at evolution, they do not take EVOLUTION as THE WAY, THE TRUTH and THE LIFE. They take evolution as, the best alternative explanation around, until something better comes along.
You might say that the bible has the best alternative explanation.
To scientific people, that is not acceptable. Why? Is it because it does not make sense? Is it because it is wrong? Is it because it is a lie?
No. It is simply not proven.
You see, scientific people will throw away Darwin's Theory of Evolution the minute something better comes along.
They are fair, they will embrace the biblical version of events the minute Christians come up with the evidence and proof.
In the same way, people "discarded" Newtonian Theory of Gravity where super large (inter-stellar) bodies are concerned. They now go with Einstein's Theory of Relativity.
There is no possibility of people accepting the biblical version unless people can come up with the proof and evidence that backs up the biblical version.
Without the proof and evidence, then who is to say that the Hindu or the Buddhist versions are not the correct versions?
If you want people to discard the Theory of Evolution, you (meaning those capable of doing so) have to come up good evidence and proof that The Theory of xxxxxx makes more sense than the Theory of Evolution.
As you have stated, Scientists are fair, and as far as I know, there are yet solid evidence or proof for both Evolution and Intelligent Design, so wouldn't it be possible for a Scientist, let's say, a microbiologist to look into the inticracies of a cell and come to a conclusion that there must be an intelligent designer behind how the cell come to be? -
No proof? Did you try to find it?Originally posted by Kachui:Probably the main contention between Science and the Bible, is how life come to be; Science says Evolution (until a better theory comes around), Bible says Intelligent design.
As you have stated, Scientists are fair, and as far as I know, there are yet to be solid evidence or proof for both Evolution and Intelligent Design, so wouldn't it be possible for a Scientist, let's say, a microbiologist to look into the inticracies of a cell and come to a conclusion that there must be an intelligent designer behind how the cell come to be? -
"Intelligent Design" is a belief. It does not rise up to the standards required by the Scientific Method.Originally posted by Kachui:Probably the main contention between Science and the Bible, is how life come to be; Science says Evolution (until a better theory comes around), Bible says Intelligent design.
As you have stated, Scientists are fair, and as far as I know, there are yet to be solid evidence or proof for both Evolution and Intelligent Design, so wouldn't it be possible for a Scientist, let's say, a microbiologist to look into the inticracies of a cell and come to a conclusion that there must be an intelligent designer behind how the cell come to be?
If a microbiologist does not come up with evidence and proof that there is an intelligent designer, it falls into the realm of beliefs.
If you say, there must be an intelligent designer, then you must say who this intelligent designer is and show proof of his existence.
There are many scientific facts to support evolution, you can Google and see them for yourself. -
If there is proof of who is doing the designing and evidence of his existence, the US courts would not have thrown out the case. The evidence and proof required by the courts system (rules of evidence) is even less stringent than that of the Scientific Method.
-
http://www.aaas.org/news/press_room/evolution/
http://www.interacademies.net/Object.File/Master/6/150/Evolution%20statement.pdf
http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_3.htm
Yeah, even the christians themselves believe in evolution:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19956961/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clergy_Letter_Project -
I stated "solid proof"... proof that will end the argument between Evolution vs Intelligent Design.Originally posted by pretzel:No proof? Did you try to find it? -
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/search/topicbrowse2.php?topic_id=46Originally posted by Kachui:I stated "solid proof"... proof that will end the argument between Evolution vs Intelligent Design.
http://unews.utah.edu/p/?r=073106-1
Evolution has already been proven to be a fact. The argument should never have existed if not for some deluded christians. The first link above is from the University of California, Berkeley. What more do you want?
What is solid proof to you? Are you a scientist?
Even the Pope and thousands of christian clergies believe in evolution. The only people who believe in creationism and intelligent design are a fraction of the christians who can provide no proof of what they claim.