Yah... the Theory of Evolutionary Origins is unadmissable to the scientific canon because it can not be observed. No beginning of the universe theory can be observed.
And species shift has never been observed either.
40 comments
The story of Genesis doesn't apply either to that cannon, double standards?. And by the way, what do you say about fossiles and radiometric dating?. That can be observed, eh?. Learn about scientific method, instead of trying to look smart.
germs
There is plenty of observation going on, just because you're unaware and unwilling to open your eyes/mind doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
And species shift has never been observed either.
Sure it has. That's why creationists have moved the goal posts and said "OK, but show me a change of kind " What's a kind? "I don't know. Find a change and we'll invent one that makes us right, and change it later if we have to".
So according to you, we shouldn't teach anything? Just ignore the topic all together?
Oh right, the babble is special because you 'know' it's true.
Well yeah, duh, you can't observe the beginning of the universe, because you wouldn't exist to watch it begin, but I mean, that's exactly why you also can't say that god did it.
You can however maybe visit the Restaurant at the end of the universe.
"Yah... the Theory of Evolutionary Origins is unadmissable to the scientific canon because it can not be observed."
It has been observed . Not that it needs to be since there are other lines of evidence that support it equally well, if not more so.
Also, there is no such thing as "scientific canon" since science isn't voted on.
"No beginning of the universe theory can be observed."
First of all, evolution has jack shit to do with the origin of the universe. Second, theories such as the origin of the universe do not have to be observed; evidence can be gathered in more ways than actual observation alone else the entire field of quantum physics wouldn't exist.
"And species shift has never been observed either."
Sure it has. See the TalkOrigins links above.
I realize that one shouldn't judge a poster by a screen name, but it's rather difficult to take a critique of evolution by someone calling himself "LegoAddict" with much seriousness -- although I guess it's marginally better than the creationists who post on the Naruto forums (not my go-to source for biological sciences discussion).
[a] Evolution is a theory in biology. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the beginning of the universe.
If "no beginning of the universe theory can be observed," how can you possibly assert that "goddidit"?
WHAT THE HELLS ARE THESE PEOPLE DOING ON AN URU BOARD?
I'm a huge fan of Myst games, and they involve far too much symbolism for fundies not to decry it as satanic, and require far too much intelligence for idiots like this to get anywhere.
So what are they doing there?
'Species' are human constructs. They do exist objectively in a sense -- grey squirrels and red squirrels, for example, do not and presumably cannot interbreed. But there is no 'BAM!' moment when one species suddenly gives birth to another. See ring species, in which two distinct species have an extant lineage of intermediates. The two end species cannot interbreed, but they can breed with the closest intermediates.
Saying there is no species shift is like saying there is no language shift. Who was the first person to speak French? The question is nonsensical. If an intermediate between two species is discovered, it's either shoehorned into one of them, or a new species is erected for it, for convenience. Taxonomy would be far harder to keep track of if contained things like 'specimen that is 60% species A and 40% species B'.
Some other things that have never been 'observed':
Electrons (oops, bye-bye electronics), or any other sub-atomic particle (sayonara quantum physics), or any two molecules undergoing a reaction (adieu chemistry), or the Earth going round the Sun (arrivederci heliocentricity, welcome back ptolomaic epicycles), or germs actually causing a disease (so-long germ theory), or energy becoming mass and vice versa (auf viedersehen special relativity), or time slowing or space bending (salaam general relativity).
True, they've all been inferred from actual observations, and strongly confirmed by subsequent studies, but observations of the actual things themselves are rarer than sightings of Elvis on a unicycle (or, for that matter, God).
Wow, when you drop everything that's inadmissible from the scientific canon, it begins to more resemble a scientific pop-gun, doesn't it!
Or was that the point?
How then is anyone ever convicted of murder? The jury wasn't present at the time of the death, they didn't see the supposed homicide.
Oh, yes, they consider the remaining evidence. Forensic scientists examine the site of the death and expert witnesses interpret their findings to the jurors. Detectives interview witnesses. Etc. Etc.
Now, I'm faced with a mountain of evidence from different fields of science that all points to the earth being 4.54 billion years old (give or take a bit). On the other hand I have one book recording some camp-fire tales recited by bronze-age nomadic goat-herders claiming it's just 6000 years old.
Guess which way my vote is going?
Oh, and google 'ring species' too. The Larus gulls are an excellent example of the phenomenon.
Edit: I see Anna Ghislaine has already pointed this out. Apologies. I was raised with a Linnaean world view, I'm just beginning to understand cladistics.
the beginning of the universe has nothing to do with the ToE.
Please stop confusing cosmology with biology.
Oh yes, and there is a type of fish called a stickleback that lives in various lakes. The sticklebacks tend to have two varieties, one that lives near the bottom of the lake and one that lives nearer the surface, these two varieties have different shapes that help them survive in their particular way of life. Now, the varieties of stickleback do sometimes mate with each other, but hybrids are rare and tend not to survive very well, so they rarely have offspring of their own, thus the gene flow between the populations is very small, if this situation continues for a few thousand or tens of thousands of years, it is likely that the sticklebacks will eventually become incapable of mating with sticklebacks of the other variety. When this happens, they will have become two separate species.
Sticklebacks are a fine example of speciatation in progress.
"Nobody has ever seen atoms, or the airgerms of amoebas."
-- Wilhelm Reich, Listen, Little Man!
Yah... the Theory of creation is unadmissable to the scientific canon because it can not be observed. No creator of the universe can be observed.
That's what you meant to say, isn't it?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
