Kinsa jud imo gituohan kung diin jud tah gikan, ang Bible or Science?

[nnixx]

---

Bible jud ko...

[anjerika]

Essentially, i have no problem what so ever on that mocking thing since the SnO days with the atheists.

Yes accepting it one day is an option… BUT… BUT… until science is done studying that theory and make a conclusions that might be imposed in schools like the Law of Gravity for instance.

Unfortunately, how can science give conclusion? Coz until now they can’t even tell how life has started…

agree ko ani. hehe. kanus-a pato gisugdan ang research, og hantod karon nagresearch lang gihapon. hehe. mao ganing gitawag og theory. hehe.

[INRI]

heheheh...rediculousss..cowardly fasion na pod ni siya! lols

Evolution is A HOAX brader...........

Cowardly fashion?
wala pa man gani nimo gtubag ang question ni kenites about popes infallibility
are you trying to evade the question in a cowardly manner?

ok you are basing on dawkins...why ni too man si dawkins about intelligent design be....lols
i rest my case....this is pure agnosticism

Hala! Karon pako nga Richard Dawkins believes in Intelligent Design..tnx for informing ha
Hatag daw links be para maka basa ta

[schmuck]

ok you are basing on dawkins...why ni too man si dawkins about intelligent design be....lols
i rest my case....this is pure agnosticism

Ha?? pataka ka man lang oi

[hitch22]

Yes accepting it one day is an option… BUT… BUT… until science is done studying that theory and make a conclusions that might be imposed in schools like the Law of Gravity for instance.

Science is not yet done with the Theory of Evolution. Yes, that's right. But like I said before, the debates have centered on HOW Evolution happened, which is divided between the neo-Darwinian camp (represented by the likes of Dawkins, Coyne, Prothero) and the Steven Gould-camp (Lewontin, Massimo, et al). That Biological Evolution occurs is a fact that mainstream science, not only accepts but asserts to be true.

Do schools in the US have to wait for science to complete the Theory? Well, essentially, which scientific theory is deemed to be complete? People once thought that Galileo and Kepler pretty much had the Theory of Gravity in the bag. Then came Newton. And then Einstein. Scientific theories keep expanding and changing as new evidence is discovered, especially with new technologies that can probe deeper on both the microscopic and galactic level. It does not align itself in the same hardlined way that religion does with its dogmas. Science is always evidence-based and it will not reject evidence just to support a desired proposition.

The answer is no. Schools don't have to wait for a theory to be completed (I don't even think that scientists expect a complete theory in the far future...maybe one day). Schools in the US teach Darwin's Theory. It's the unifying principle among the various sub-branches of biology, from agriculture to genetics. I don't think I've emphasized this enough...I've provided the posts and links above regarding the statements from the National Academy of Sciences on this issue. Please read them if you have the time.

Unfortunately, how can science give conclusion? Coz until now they can’t even tell how life has started…

You're right. Science hasn't gotten to the point where it can tell you how life started. Theory of Evolution is about an explanation of how we get the living species we have in our planet today. But it does not say anything about getting life from non-life. The Miller-Urey experiment in the 1950s started to explore that possibility. It attempted to test J.B.S. Haldane's hypothesis of chemical evolution and results were groundbreaking: the conditions on the primitive Earth favored chemical reactions that synthesized organic compounds from inorganic precursors...not necessarily living cells, but the building blocks for living cells could be synthesized from inorganic matter.

As you know, Craig Venter recently unveiled his successful attempt at creating synthetic living cells. Although this is far from creating life from non-life, rest-assuredly, we're moving along quite fast toward that objective.

But to say Evolution is a hoax because it can't explain how life started, as what bungot25 said,...JUST REVEALS HIS LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OF DARWIN'S THEORY. Darwin's theory is not about how life started from non-life (Refer to my above statement about science and the origin of life). That's why I always put the challenge to the Darwin-debunkers: Read and understand the Theory of Evolution FIRST, and then pick out a claim that it makes which you think is FALSE. Post that claim here and explain why it's false, and we can debate seriously. In fact, if you seriously find it false, bring that up with the National Academy of Sciences...YOU COULD WIN A NOBEL PRIZE FOR THAT!

Here's one falsifiable evidence that can be used against the Theory of Evolution: FIND A FOSSIL OF A RABBIT THAT DATES TO THE PRECAMBRIAN PERIOD.

People understate the importance of FOSSIL RECORDS. FOSSIL RECORDS serve as the Theory's report card. 100% of all the fossils fall exactly within the periods which the Theory predicted. That's how accurate it is. EVEN WITHOUT A SINGLE FOSSIL RECORD, the Theory is still solid. Our ability to sequence genomes has actually served to fortify the Theory even more. It proves the common descent of all living things on earth.

Some people in this forum dismissed genetic similarities as proof of common descent. Well, not long ago, we had the Sulpicio tragedy. How did the company decide on which claims were to be honored? Through DNA similarities. Even the courts recognize DNA results as proof of common descent.

What more can I say?

[schmuck]

@hitch
What more can I say?

nga ang dili ganahan makat-on dili jd makakat-on

[INRI]

Bravo Hitch22!!
You've nailed it man!

[remz399]

nver man cguro na mahimo nga LAW ang theory bout big bang./.


hahaha.. losers,,!!1

[cobraKing]

big bang??hmmmm dli ko mka relate ana..maypa sa bible kay naa jud explaination..

[orcgod]

ok you are basing on dawkins...why ni too man si dawkins about intelligent design be....lols
i rest my case....this is pure agnosticism

pag research sa before magpataka.