Evolution - Science Comedian Brian Malow

jmckaskle Says:

Jul 23, 2009 - What is God made out of?

Wampaa Says:

Aug 6, 2009 - Bullshit?

DrMaryMalone Says:

Aug 12, 2009 - Science is not about opinions. It's about facts.

MinisterialServant Says:

Aug 27, 2009 - That's not all true lol. Usually opinions begin theories and start the testing. So Science has a lot to do with opinions to begin with. And where there is not enough evidence, opinions and ideas are all that's left to fill in the gaps.

Lizardgizzard92 Says:

Sep 2, 2009 - Evolution is fack people have proven it to be fals all the way. SO HA to all of you dumb people

FlyingEvolutionist59 Says:

Sep 8, 2009 - By "all of you dumb people" are you including the 99% of the scientific community that accepts evolution?

69play69time69 Says:

Sep 9, 2009 - Isnt it all incest after adam and eve .Actually she is made from his DNA so isnt it incest right from go ?

Xeletoph Says:

Sep 12, 2009 - actually - something does not gain the title of 'theory' until it's been so strongly established that it's rationally impossible to deny it. The word 'theory' in scientific context is the strongest annotation leaning towards factual, to be found in science. Things like Gravity are considered theories, as are cells and atoms. If something is not very well established, or lacking in evidence it given the title "hypothesis". Science does not confuse one, with the other. The difference is clear.

Xeletoph Says:

Sep 12, 2009 - what you're also failing to grasp about the word 'theory' is that it has a different context in science, then it does in conversation. When talking in day to day topics, the word 'theory' can mean a guess. But when you're dealing with forms of science, the word 'theory' regards to a scientific study of something that's factual. Gravity is a fact, the theory of gravity is the study of the forces involved with gravity. Evolution is a fact in the same way. Deny it's existence, and get laughed at.

Xeletoph Says:

Sep 12, 2009 - Evolution is better established (understood by science) then gravity is. Would you deny the forces of gravity exist, and there is no proof of its existence? You'd have a lot more chance of proving the theory of gravity to be false, then you would evolution. There are things like 'gravitons' involved in the gravity theory, which are a mysterious kind of molecule that science cannot yet detect, yet thinks is there. But, do you assault the gravity theory as you do evolution? No. May I ask you why?

MinisterialServant Says:

Sep 14, 2009 - I didn't confuse the meanings of either of those words. And YES, "scientific" or "expert" "opinions" are often thrown about to begin a scientific hypothesis, so don't go around saying, "science isn't about opinions." Secondly, it is a "theory," because Science cannot "prove" things absolutely, the "theory" is what they believe and interpret the data, as to how to understand the subject. Simply because it is a "theory" does not mean the interpretation of the data is correct, plenty of examples.

MinisterialServant Says:

Sep 14, 2009 - The whole, "you dont reject gravity" and "gravity is a theory too!" argument is getting old. If you cannot understand why people don't "assault" that theory then I don't know what to tell you. Maybe they just don't care? Maybe because they can go home and observe gravity? I don't know why people don't "assault" gravity, but from what I've witnessed, people "assault" the theory! And that is exactly what people are doing the Natural Selection and Evolution. The theory.

Xeletoph Says:

Sep 14, 2009 - But you can go home and observe evolution. All it takes is for to be responsible for the breeding of a new type of dog, cat, bird etc. Animal Breeding is guided selection. To where, instead of survival of the fittest, the desirable traits are chosen by the breeder. Those creatures that share the desirable traits are bred together, and the young then carry that trait a little more strongly. Breeding like this can create English Wolf hounds, to Tea Cup Chihuahuas, and all breeds in between.

Xeletoph Says:

Sep 14, 2009 - And that's exactly what evo claims is done. A Tea Cup Chihuahua and English Wolf Hound could never breed in a natural setting, thus they have diverged far enough to be considered two different species. But they're still dogs. Evolution never claims that dogs give birth to cats, or anything as such. It does not claim that said mutations can take place in just one generation. It takes dozens or even hundreds of generations to establish a mutation, even with guided selection seen in animal breeding

MinisterialServant Says:

Sep 14, 2009 - This is called selective breeding. Even if it may fall under the WIDE umbrella of "Evolution" such as adaptations, niches etc, its called breeding. People have been doing it before Evolution was even thought up. Most people don't deny this type of breeding of part of the evolutionary umbrella. Same how they do not deny adaptation. What people reject are not those things, they reject the idea that say, a Tree and a Vertebrae have a common ancestor at the bottom of the "tree of life."

MinisterialServant Says:

Sep 14, 2009 - For example, man being supposedly traced and linked down to a whale.

Xeletoph Says:

Sep 14, 2009 - and lastly, nothing about theories is opinion driven. The word theory in scientific context is the strongest annotation a subject can poses. A theory is demonstrated through observed, demonstrable, and even foreseeable events. Theories are not thrown together, haphazardly by the opinions of people who know a lot about something. It's far more complicated then that. The reason why gravity is compared to evo, is because evo is every bit as factual as gravity. To deny it is to deny reality its self

Xeletoph Says:

Sep 14, 2009 - No no no! At that point, these creatures are not men and are not considered in the same family. Whales were mammals once, but they left tera firma for the oceans. The only relation whales have to human beings is their mammalian category, and that is all. Here you have demonstrated a very strong misunderstanding of evolution mechanics.

MinisterialServant Says:

Sep 14, 2009 - Seriously, have you read about the crazy "debates" scientists have had (even on the mechanism of natural selection"?) If you have, you'd see the ton of opinions that get thrown around. I am not saying the final outcome of a subject's study is an opinion, but an opinion DOES start some form of research, hypothesis (which I already mentioned) and so forth. Opinion is a portion of it all.

Xeletoph Says:

Sep 14, 2009 - LOL. Typo. hahah too early in the morning for me. they were always mammals, what I meant is that once they were land based, but left tera firma for the ocean. Whales would no longer be able to breed with their land variety mammals, even though they're still in the mammalian family. That is what dictates them being a different species.

Xeletoph Says:

Sep 14, 2009 - Oh and these creatures, even in their land phase, were never connected to the primate family like we are. Humans did not come from monkeys, we came from a common ancestor meaning that we descended from a family of apes that already carried many of our traits. Humans are primates, as well as apes, in the same way that a mallard is a bird, and a kind of duck. You should read up on speciation.

ndyt Says:

Sep 15, 2009 - Xeletoph, whales are still mammals. They give milk to their young, that makes them mammals.

Xeletoph Says:

Sep 16, 2009 - yeah, I typoed that on accident. the statement I said below covers that. I realize whales are mammals. haha. Truth is, I was a little drunk when I typed that so I screwed up a little. haha.

pubuman Says:

Nov 15, 2009 - what the fuck are you on about?

MinisterialServant Says:

Nov 16, 2009 - . . . Well your lack of a real sentence as a "Reply" to my apparent most begs the same question back.