Who Is Your Creator message forum

 

Who Is Your Creator message forum
This Forum is Locked
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Enough of evolutionary psychology. Where's your proof?

1. Creating hypotheses to explain observations is perfectly acceptable to devise a theory. However, for a theory to be considered factual, it requires actual facts or observations substantiating it. Otherwise, it's just a premise.

2. Determining what is science by satisfying anyone's mind is pure nonsense.

3. If you want to pursue this type of debate, please email the other participants personally. This forum is for evolutionists to attempt to scientifically prove that evolution occurs, not to explore it's philosophical consequence.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Creating hypotheses to explain observations, and then collecting new data to test the predictions made from these hypotheses is how science works. If the new data don't fit, create new (perhaps only refined) hypotheses. That IS how science works, and that IS how the modern theory of evolution and its many many predictions have been tested. Repeatedly. So accepting the theory of evolution IS science, not mythology. I'm satisfied with the validity of the theory of evolution - but not with the completeness of our knowledge about HOW, WHY, or WHEN everything evolved. Also, I'm not yet satisfied with our understanding of all of the underlying MECHANISMS of evolutions.

My point was that while the theory of evolution is satisfying to a scientific mind - for all of the reasons that I have listed - the god-hypothesis doesn't measure up. Its funny that you mention mythology - because, historically, many ancient myths have been about gods, haven't they? I would add one more god to that list.

Re: Enough of evolutionary psychology. Where's your proof?

Two tenets of the theory of evolution are that 1) all living things are related to each other (i.e., have a shared ancestry) and, 2) ancestor-descendent lineages accumulate changes over time (i.e., evolve away from their starting point). Predictions that arises from these tenets are that some species should be more similar to each other (in terms of morphology) than they are to others. Furthermore, they should be more similar at the genetic level - not only when considering genes that affect their morphology (that might be considered circular), but also at genetic loci that have no morphological effects. When we collect data to test these predictions, we find that they are correct.

This is not hypothetical. These are "facts" that support the theory of evolution.

Since you are new, we'll give you slack.

Unless you provide the actual proof that substantiates your 'facts,' they are nothing but your opinion.

Since you make the claim of 'data,' provide your data and we'll go over it with you.

Otherwise, any further postings without specific references to data and research will be deleted.