RunRyder RC
WATCH
 711 pages [ <<    <     297     ( 298 )     299     NEXT    >> ] 326364 views TOPIC CLOSED
HomeOff Topics News & Politics › God Did Create Mankind.
05-14-2011 11:30 AM  7 years agoPost 5941
Thomas L Erb

rrKey Veteran

Alliance ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

you have faith, I have evidence that is backed by the scientific community.[evolution, fossils and dates]
evolution - THEORY

fossils- yep lots of them we agree

dates -
yes thats how long science places homo sapiens
THEORY again!
if im not mistaken carbon dating only goes back accurately what 58,000 years.
so after that what science's answer -- THEORY
we already covered that writing goes back 6,000 years ago.
If your THEORY is correct then why does so much of the historical written record stop around this time? May be a flood wiped it all away?

out you seem to be an intelligent man yet despite that you will not take a real look at what is in front of you. The beauty and complexity of all of creation should awe you to see that this can not happen just by chance

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 01:50 PM  7 years agoPost 5942
Rogman88

rrElite Veteran

West Monroe, LA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

homo sapiens have been on the planet 197,000 years previous to ancient hebrews
Once again how do you know those skulls and skeletons are that old? What is the scientific proof that a bunch of different shaped bones are in order of oldness. DNA has not been extracted from any of them to determine genetic patterns from one to the next. There's no proof that the earth is 3.5 billion years old for that matter. It is merely speculation and you have "faith" that it is, just like I have faith that it isn't.

Thank you for your time answering...this is fun!

Roger

High Voltage just works better

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 05:52 PM  7 years agoPost 5943
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

we teach evolution in schools today as creation has been outlawed in schools.

I see you cannot argue or refute my previous reply as much went ignored.

I understand this is what happens when one either has no knowledge of the subject or one just doesnt want to face the truth. Ignornace doesnt cut it with me as lame exuse for false beliefs.
There's no proof that the earth is 3.5 billion years old for that matter
sorry rogman88, the age of the earth is not up for debate.

for you a educated man to question dating is just making look very ignorant and is clearly ludicrous.

its solid and down pat.

why is it religious people cannot grasp solid science that is undisputed???? this is why we outlawed creation in public schools. Its terrible for humanity.

you put the bible under the same scrutiny as you do science and it falls flat on its face as ancient fiction written as poems and allegory fall short of historical truths. The bible was written as stolen myth's from egypt and sumerian cultures. Ancient hebrews started their culture around 1250BC and they had to create a religion as all cultures had a religion. They created your god, jews wrote the OT, jesus was a jew and hellenistic jews wrote the NT and then changed your god [which really ticked off the nonhellenistic jews that created the first god]

you sir cannot even explain the trinity with a straight face as that is a %100 man made as it is not taught in the gospels anywhere.

man defined god when they made him and redefined god as time went by.

exactly like hell changed over a 1500 year period and was redefined by man alone.

next thing you will tell me is noahs global flood did it lol

Accuracy of Fossils and Dating Methods

http://actionbioscience.org/evolution/benton.html

Our understanding of the shape and pattern of the history of life depends on the accuracy of fossils and dating methods. Some critics, particularly religious fundamentalists, argue that neither fossils nor dating can be trusted, and that their interpretations are better. Other critics, perhaps more familiar with the data, question certain aspects of the quality of the fossil record and of its dating. These skeptics do not provide scientific evidence for their views. Current understanding of the history of life is probably close to the truth because it is based on repeated and careful testing and consideration of data.

The rejection of the validity of fossils and of dating by religious fundamentalists creates a problem for them:

Millions of fossils have been discovered.

•They cannot deny that hundreds of millions of fossils reside in display cases and drawers around the world. Perhaps some would argue that these specimens - huge skeletons of dinosaurs, blocks from ancient shell beds containing hundreds of specimens, delicately preserved fern fronds — have been manufactured by scientists to confuse the public. This is clearly ludicrous.

Some skeptics believe that all fossils are the same age.

•Otherwise, religious fundamentalists are forced to claim that all the fossils are of the same age, somehow buried in the rocks by some extraordinary catastrophe, perhaps Noah’s flood. How exactly they believe that all the dinosaurs, mammoths, early humans, heavily-armored fishes, trilobites, ammonites, and the rest could all live together has never been explained. Nor indeed why the marine creatures were somehow ‘drowned’ by the flood.

Rejecting fossil data cannot be supported by proof.

•The rejection of dating by religious fundamentalists is easier for them to make, but harder for them to demonstrate. The fossils occur in regular sequences time after time; radioactive decay happens, and repeated cross testing of radiometric dates confirms their validity.

rogman88 let me tell you something about YEC [young earth creationist] The new generation doesnt follow ancient myths as religion has been legally shoved out of school for the damage it does.

like it or not people are advancing out of the dark age's

everyone knows YEC is a joke, and those who believe are severly brainwashed due to a religion they follow only because of the geographic location they were born

dont mind my snideness and rudeness bud your still a heli brother first, i get worked up easy

its not as much a personal attack as it is one on certain beliefs

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 06:02 PM  7 years agoPost 5944
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

thomas
evolution - THEORY
THEORY again!
do you know what a theory is??? I dont think so

do you know what a scientific theory is, well I know you dont.

you need to learn thomas, ignornace is not a good way to die

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 06:08 PM  7 years agoPost 5945
Phaedrus

rrKey Veteran

S. Orange County, California

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I always like to remind people who try to disregard evolution by saying it is "just a theory" that gravity is also "just a theory". In fact, we know less about gravity than we do evolution. Yet nobody seems to want to proclaim that it is "God Glue" that keeps us from flying off into space.

As far as gravity goes, we know very precisely what it does, but we really have very little clue as to what it "IS" and how it works. It just might be God Glue after all!! Think about it, once God created man I am certain he did not want them flung into space by the spinning earth, hence the need for God Glue.

AMA Leader Member
Go FASST, or Go Home!!
Team Futaba

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 06:29 PM  7 years agoPost 5946
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

why does so much of the historical written record stop around this time?
Thomas you need to understand culture and social structure.

for writing to take of you need a city or town and stability.

with no teachers and no classrooms how do you think nomadic people ever had a need to write anything???

agriculture started in the levant about 12,000 years ago, this brought people out of the stone age and a primitive nomadic lifestyle. This agriculture was due to a raise in population in that specific area. Tribes of people started to settle down and as population led to structure, structure led to government and city's were born.

large citys led to writing so they could capture and pass on what was important to them. they lived by luck alone in which they created deitys to explain the good and bad luck as well as created deitys to explain what they did not know. This wasnt a game it was survival, deitys were important, so important its the first thing that was written down by superstitious people.

to give you an idea how great the sumerian and egyptian cultures were and how much of a influence they had on semetic speaking people in the levant. One only needs to look at how long they survived until a drought brought them down. They made it thousands of years, much longer then our current civilization.
May be a flood wiped it all away?
No Thomas ,,, there was never a global flood. There were no major large cultures "before" egyptians and sumerians and the chineese. Its all a matter of controlled population.

There was however a attested flood on the euphrates in 2900BC 1900 years before the first words of genesis were written. this flood happened exactly where noahs story originates from. As a matter of fact the oldest of three sumerian flood storys matches almost word for word in many places to the hebrew version. A man trapped by rising waters loaded his animals on a barge and floated to sea after a 6 day thunderstorm on a already swollen river. When he landed he burned a animal sacrifice as noah was said to do.

to give you an idea of how the bible and noah was written you need to understand semetic people from egypt and sumer as well as nomadic semetic speaking people all gathered in the holy land and started their culture as stated in 1250 BC and brought with them the fables of ALL the cultures before them. Only 250 years after their culture formed do we start to see religious writings pop up. Well every culture needed a god so they created their's. Yes plural they worshipped god who had a wife and other deitys for a few hundred years before they switched to monotheism and early works were all edited and changed

thats why it states "god made man in """our""" image, its why there is 2 different creation storys and why there is two different flood storys.

it was just a compilation of what they knew about previous religions written after hundreds of years of oral tradition. meaning all the storys in the bible were told around jewish campfires before they were written as religious leaders wanted them to be.

not one bit of divinity in a stolen/borrowed and edited religion created over 3000 years ago
out you seem to be an intelligent man yet despite that you will not take a real look at what is in front of you. The beauty and complexity of all of creation should awe you to see that this can not happen just by chance
Nature is beautiful Bud, but thats no real arguement for a deity

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 06:35 PM  7 years agoPost 5947
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

It is merely speculation and you have "faith" that it is, just like I have faith that it isn't.
faith is belief in the absence of evidence

that is what religion is

science however is based on evidence

the two cannot be compared as faith by any means

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 07:17 PM  7 years agoPost 5948
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

science however is based on evidence
Science is for the most part.

But, scientific theory is not necessarily:

When a scientist tells you ‘The science is settled’ in regard to any subject, he’s ceased to be a scientist, and he’s become an evangelist for one cult or another.

The entire history of science is that nothing in science is ever settled. New discoveries are continuously made, and they upend old certainties.

That should be obvious.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 07:27 PM  7 years agoPost 5949
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

great you figured out science will change information as it becomes avaible

unlike a stagnent religion

Newton with a brilliant mind was the first to write about gravity.

Einstein added to it

but the apple still falls down

you dont have a valid point of anything

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 07:32 PM  7 years agoPost 5950
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

you dont have a valid point of anything
Same as you.

You spout evolution as being the beginnings of man like an evangical preacher. A nasty one.

But, you have no solid proof. There are simply to many gaps in the science of evolution. You ignore them all with pics of skulls and unreadable charts to say, "See I Told You So !!."

No one knows the beginnings of man. Nobody.

If all of a sudden, there was irrefutable proof that we have discovered the beginnings of man, that would be one of the biggest stories in the history of man.

There is no story because there is no proof.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 08:03 PM  7 years agoPost 5951
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 08:04 PM  7 years agoPost 5952
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

No one knows the beginnings of man. Nobody
everyone knows,, everybody.

religious people just deny the facts thats all

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 08:23 PM  7 years agoPost 5953
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

No one knows the beginnings of man. Nobody
everyone knows,, everybody.
Everybody ???

Really ???

You sure are getting a lot of argument here.
religious people just deny the facts thats all
Where is the biggest story in the history of man outhouse? Where is it?

It does not exist because there is no proof. Just to many gaps in the science of evolution as the beginnings of man.

Years ago, there was the "Missing Links" or "Gaps". The science of evolution never found them. They never could fill in the "missing gaps". In short, "How Did One Skull Evolve Into Another?". They could not answer that question. So, now, of course, they say there never was any "missing links".

Very convenient.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 08:35 PM  7 years agoPost 5954
Thomas L Erb

rrKey Veteran

Alliance ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

do you know what a theory is??? I dont think so
.?? I thought you knew already . Here. It is for you from your favorite source

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see Theory (disambiguation).
Originally the word theory is a technical term from Ancient Greek. It is derived from theoria, θεωρία, meaning "a looking at, viewing, beholding", and refers to contemplation or speculation, as opposed to action.[1] Theory is especially often contrasted to "practice" (Greek praxis, πρᾶξις an Aristotelian concept which is used in a broad way to refer to any thing done for the sake of any action, in contrast with theory, which is not. "Theoria" is also a word still used in theological contexts.
A classical example of the distinction between theoretical and practical uses the discipline of medicine: Medical theory and theorizing involves trying to understand the causes and nature of health and sickness, while the practical side of medicine is trying to make people healthy. These two things are related but can be independent, because it is possible to research health and sickness without curing specific patients, and it is possible to cure a patient without knowing how the cure worked.[2]
While theories in the arts and philosophy may address ideas and empirical phenomena which are not easily observable, in modern science the term "theory", or "scientific theory" is generally understood to refer to a proposed explanation of empirical phenomena, made in a way consistent with scientific method. Such theories are preferably described in such a way that any scientist in the field is in a position to understand, verify, and challenge (or "falsify" it. In this modern scientific context the distinction between theory and practice corresponds roughly to the distinction between theoretical science and technology or applied science. A common distinction made in science is between theories and hypotheses, with the former being considered as satisfactorily tested or proven and the latter used to denote conjectures or proposed descriptions or models which have not yet been tested or proven to the same standard.
Contents [hide]
1 Other ancient uses
2 Theories formally and generally
2.1 Underdetermination
2.2 Intertheoretic reduction and elimination
2.3 Theories vs. theorems
3 Philosophical theories
3.1 Metatheory
3.2 Political theories
4 Scientific theories
4.1 Theories as models
4.2 Theories in physics
4.3 Pedagogical definition
4.4 The term theoretical
5 List of notable theories
6 See also
7 Notes
8 References
[edit]Other ancient uses

The word θεωρία apparently developed special uses early in the Greek language. In the book, From Religion to Philosophy, Francis Cornford suggests that the Orphics used the word "theory" to mean 'passionate sympathetic contemplation'.[3] Pythagoras changed the word to mean a passionate sympathetic contemplation of mathematical and scientific knowledge. This was because Pythagoras considered such intellectual pursuits the way to reach the highest plane of existence. Pythagoras emphasized subduing emotions and bodily desires in order to enable the intellect to function at the higher plane of theory. Thus it was Pythagoras who gave the word "theory" the specific meaning which leads to the classical and modern concept of a distinction between theory as uninvolved, neutral thinking, and practice.[4]
[edit]Theories formally and generally

Main article: Theory (mathematical logic)
Theories are analytical tools for understanding, explaining, and making predictions about a given subject matter. There are theories in many and varied fields of study, including the arts and sciences. A formal theory is syntactic in nature and is only meaningful when given a semantic component by applying it to some content (i.e. facts and relationships of the actual historical world as it is unfolding). Theories in various fields of study are expressed in natural language, but are always constructed in such a way that their general form is identical to a theory as it is expressed in the formal language of mathematical logic. Theories may be expressed mathematically, symbolically, or in common language, but are generally expected to follow principles of rational thought or logic.
Theory is constructed of a set of sentences which consist entirely of true statements about the subject matter under consideration. However, the truth of any one of these statements is always relative to the whole theory. Therefore the same statement may be true with respect to one theory, and not true with respect to another. This is, in ordinary language, where statements such as "He is a terrible person" cannot be judged to be true or false without reference to some interpretation of who "He" is and for that matter what a "terrible person" is under the theory.[5]
Sometimes two theories have exactly the same explanatory power because they make the same predictions. A pair of such theories is called indistinguishable, and the choice between them reduces to convenience or philosophical preference.
The form of theories is studied formally in mathematical logic, especially in model theory. When theories are studied in mathematics, they are usually expressed in some formal language and their statements are closed under application of certain procedures called rules of inference. A special case of this, an axiomatic theory, consists of axioms (or axiom schemata) and rules of inference. A theorem is a statement that can be derived from those axioms by application of these rules of inference. Theories used in applications are abstractions of observed phenomena and the resulting theorems provide solutions to real-world problems. Obvious examples include arithmetic (abstracting concepts of number), geometry (concepts of space), and probability (concepts of randomness and likelihood).
Gödel's incompleteness theorem shows that no consistent, recursively enumerable theory (that is, one whose theorems form a recursively enumerable set) in which the concept of natural numbers can be expressed, can include all true statements about them. As a result, some domains of knowledge cannot be formalized, accurately and completely, as mathematical theories. (Here, formalizing accurately and completely means that all true propositions—and only true propositions—are derivable within the mathematical system.) This limitation, however, in no way precludes the construction of mathematical theories that formalize large bodies of scientific knowledge.
[edit]Underdetermination
Main article: Underdetermination
A theory is underdetermined (also called indeterminacy of data to theory) if, given the available evidence cited to support the theory, there is a rival theory which is inconsistent with it that is at least as consistent with the evidence. Underdetermination is an epistemological issue about the relation of evidence to conclusions.
[edit]Intertheoretic reduction and elimination
Main article: intertheoretic reduction
If there is a new theory which is better at explaining and predicting phenomena than an older theory (i.e. it has more explanatory power), we are justified in believing that the newer theory describes reality more correctly. This is called an intertheoretic reduction because the terms of the old theory can be reduced to the terms of the new one. For instance, our historical understanding about "sound," "light" and "heat" have today been reduced to "wave compressions and rarefactions," "electromagnetic waves," and "molecular kinetic energy," respectively. These terms which are identified with each other are called intertheoretic identities. When an old theory and a new one are parallel in this way, we can conclude that we are describing the same reality, only more completely.
In cases where a new theory uses new terms which do not reduce to terms of an older one, but rather replace them entirely because they are actually a misrepresentation it is called an intertheoretic elimination. For instance, the obsolete scientific theory that put forward an understanding of heat transfer in terms of the movement of caloric fluid was eliminated when a theory of heat as energy replaced it. Also, the theory that phlogiston is a substance released from burning and rusting material was eliminated with the new understanding of the reactivity of oxygen.
[edit]Theories vs. theorems
Theories are distinct from theorems: theorems are derived deductively from theories according to a formal system of rules, generally as a first step in testing or applying the theory in a concrete situation. Theories are abstract and conceptual, and to this end they are never considered right or wrong. Instead, they are supported or challenged by observations in the world. They are 'rigorously tentative', meaning that they are proposed as true but expected to satisfy careful examination to account for the possibility of faulty inference or incorrect observation. Sometimes theories are falsified, meaning that an explicit set of observations contradicts some fundamental assumption of the theory, but more often theories are revised to conform to new observations, by restricting the class of phenomena the theory applies to or changing the assertions made. Sometimes a theory is set aside by scholars because there is no way to examine its assertions analytically; these may continue on in the popular imagination until some means of examination is found which either refutes or lends credence to the theory.
[edit]Philosophical theories

Main article: Philosophical theory
Theories whose subject matter consists not in empirical data, but rather in ideas are in the realm of philosophical theories as contrasted with scientific theories. At least some of the elementary theorems of a philosophical theory are statements whose truth cannot necessarily be scientifically tested through empirical observation.
Fields of study are sometimes named "theory" because their basis is some initial set of assumptions describing the field's approach to a subject matter. These assumptions are the elementary theorems of the particular theory, and can be thought of as the axioms of that field. Some commonly known examples include set theory, game theory, and number theory; however literary theory, critical theory, and music theory are also of the same form.
[edit]Metatheory
Main article: Metatheory
One form of philosophical theory is a metatheory or meta-theory. A metatheory is a theory whose subject matter is some other theory. In other words it is a theory about a theory. Statements made in the metatheory about the theory are called metatheorems.
[edit]Political theories
Main article: Political theory
A political theory is an ethical theory about the law and government. Often the term "political theory" refers to a general view, or specific ethic, political belief or attitude, about politics.
[edit]Scientific theories

Main article: Scientific theory
In scientific usage, the term "theory" is reserved for explanations of phenomena which meet basic requirements about the kinds of empirical observations made, the methods of classification used, and the consistency of the theory in its application among members of the class to which it pertains. These requirements vary across different scientific fields of knowledge, but in general theories are expected to be functional and parsimonious: i.e. a theory should be the simplest possible tool that can be used to effectively address the given class of phenomena. Such theories are constructed from elementary theorems that consist in empirical data about observable phenomena. A scientific theory is used as a plausible general principle or body of principles offered to explain a phenomenon.[6]
A scientific theory is a deductive theory, in that, its content is based on some formal system of logic and that some of its elementary theorems are taken as axioms. In a deductive theory, any sentence which is a logical consequence of one or more of the axioms is also a sentence of that theory.[5]
A major concern in construction of scientific theories is the problem of demarcation, i.e., distinguishing those ideas that are properly studied by the sciences and those that are not.
Theories are intended to be an accurate, predictive description of the natural world.
[edit]Theories as models
Main article: Scientific model
Scientific theories are constructed to explain, predict, and master phenomena (e.g., inanimate things, events, or behavior of animals). A scientific theory can be thought of as a model of reality, and its statements as axioms of some axiomatic system. The aim of this construction is to create a formal system for which reality is the only model. The world is an interpretation (or model) of such scientific theories, only insofar as the sciences are true.
[edit]Theories in physics
In physics the term theory is generally used for a mathematical framework—derived from a small set of basic postulates (usually symmetries—like equality of locations in space or in time, or identity of electrons, etc.)—which is capable of producing experimental predictions for a given category of physical systems. A good example is classical electromagnetism, which encompasses results derived from gauge symmetry (sometimes called gauge invariance) in a form of a few equations called Maxwell's equations. Note that the specific theoretical aspects of classical electromagnetic theory, which have been consistently and successfully replicated for well over a century, are termed "laws of electromagnetism", reflecting that they are today taken for granted. Within electromagnetic theory generally, there are numerous hypotheses about how electromagnetism applies to specific situations. Many of these hypotheses are already considered to be adequately tested, with new ones always in the making and perhaps untested.
[edit]Pedagogical definition
In pedagogical contexts or in official pronouncements by official organizations of scientists a definition such as the following may be promulgated.
According to the United States National Academy of Sciences,
Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature supported by facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena,[7]
Look up theory in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
According to the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world. The theory of biological evolution is more than "just a theory." It is as factual an explanation of the universe as the atomic theory of matter or the germ theory of disease. Our understanding of gravity is still a work in progress. But the phenomenon of gravity, like evolution, is an accepted fact.[8]
The primary advantage enjoyed by this definition is that it firmly marks things termed theories as being well supported by evidence. This would be a disadvantage in interpreting real discourse between scientists who often use the word theory to describe untested but intricate hypotheses in addition to repeatedly confirmed models. However, in an educational or mass media setting it is almost certain that everything of the form X theory is an extremely well supported and well tested theory. This causes the theory/non-theory distinction to much more closely follow the distinctions useful for consumers of science (e.g. should I believe something or not?)
[edit]The term theoretical
The term theoretical is sometimes informally used in place of hypothetical to describe a result that is predicted, but has not yet been adequately tested by observation or experiment. A hypothesis is the application of a theory or theories to new conditions which has yet to be tested while a theory is a prediction based on previous observations or experiments of the same or similar circumstances. It is not, however, uncommon for a theory to produce predictions that are later confirmed or proven incorrect by experiment. By inference, a prediction proved incorrect by experiment demonstrates the hypothesis is invalid. This either means the theory is incorrect, or the experimental conjecture was wrong and the theory did not predict the hypothesis.
[edit]List of notable theories

Find more about Theory on Wikipedia's sister projects:
Definitions from Wiktionary
Images and media from Commons
Learning resources from Wikiversity
News stories from Wikinews
Quotations from Wikiquote
Source texts from Wikisource
Textbooks from Wikibooks
Astronomy: Big Bang Theory
Biology: Cell theory — Evolution — Germ theory
Chemistry: Atomic theory — Kinetic theory of gases
Climatology: Climate change theory (due to anthropogenic activity)
Education: Constructivist theory — Critical pedagogy theory — Education theory — Multiple intelligence theory — Progressive education theory
Engineering: Circuit theory — Control theory — Signal theory — Systems theory — Information theory
Film: Film Theory
Geology: Plate tectonics
Humanities: Critical theory
Literature: Literary theory
Mathematics: Approximation theory — Arakelov theory — Asymptotic theory — Bifurcation theory — Catastrophe theory — Category theory — Chaos theory — Choquet theory — Coding theory — Combinatorial game theory — Deformation theory — Dimension theory — Ergodic theory — Field theory — Galois theory — Game theory — Graph theory — Group theory — Hodge theory — Homology theory — Homotopy theory — Ideal theory — Intersection theory — Invariant theory — Iwasawa theory — K-theory — KK-theory — Knot theory — L-theory — Lie theory — Littlewood–Paley theory — Matrix theory — Measure theory — Model theory — Morse theory — Nevanlinna theory — Number theory — Obstruction theory — Operator theory — PCF theory — Perturbation theory — Potential theory — Probability theory — Ramsey theory — Rational choice theory — Representation theory — Ring theory — Set theory — Shape theory — Small cancellation theory — Spectral theory — Stability theory — Stable theory — Sturm–Liouville theory — Twistor theory
Music: Music theory
Philosophy: Proof theory — Speculative reason — Theory of truth — Type theory — Value theory — Virtue theory
Physics: Acoustic theory — Antenna theory — BCS theory — Landau theory — M-theory — Perturbation theory — Theory of relativity — Quantum field theory — Scattering theory — String theory
Planetary science: Giant impact theory
Visual Art: Aesthetics — Art Educational theory — Architecture — Composition — Anatomy — Color theory — Perspective — Visual perception — Geometry — Manifolds
Sociology: Sociological theory — Social theory — Critical theory
Sports: Chess theory
Statistics : Extreme value theory
Theatre : Theory relating to theatrical performance.
Other: Obsolete scientific theories — Phlogiston theory
[edit]See also

Falsifiability
Formal language
Formal system
Hypothesis
Hypothesis testing
Model
Predictive power
Scientific method
Testability
[edit]Notes

^ Originally the word "theory" was used in Greek philosophy; for example, that of Plato. It is related to θεωρός "spectator", θέα thea "a view" + ὁρᾶν horan "to see", literally "looking at a show". See for example dictionary entries at Perseus website. The word has been in use in English since at least the late 16th century.Harper, Douglas. "theory". Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved 2008-07-18.
^ See for example Hippocrates Praeceptiones, Part 1.
^ Cornford, Francis Macdonald (November 8, 1991). From religion to philosophy: a study in the origins of western speculation. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0691020761.
^ Russell, Bertrand, History of Western Philosophy
^ a b Curry, Haskell, Foundations of Mathematical Logic
^ Merriam-Webster.com Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Theory in Science
^ National Academy of Sciences (2005), Science, Evolution, and Creationism, a brochure on the book of the same title.
^ AAAS Evolution Resources
[edit]References

Chairman of Biology and Kennesaw State Ronald Matson's webpage comparing scientific laws and theories
Davidson Reynolds, Paul (1971). A primer in theory construction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Hawking, Stephen (1996). "The Illustrated A Brief History of Time" (Updated and expanded ed.). New York: Bantam Books, p. 15.
Mohr, Johnathon (2008). "Revelations and Implications of the Failure of Pragmatism: The Hijacking of Knowledge Creation by the Ivory Tower". New York: Ballantine Books. pp. 87–192.
Popper, Karl (1963), Conjectures and Refutations, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, UK, pp. 33–39. Reprinted in Theodore Schick (ed., 2000), Readings in the Philosophy of Science, Mayfield Publishing Company, Mountain View, Calif., pp. 9–13.
Zima, Peter V. (2007). What is theory? Cultural theory as discourse and dialogue. London: Continuum. (Translated from: Was ist Theorie? Theoriebegriff und Dialogische Theorie in der Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften. Tübingen: A. Franke Verlag, 2004).
Categories: Mathematical terminology | Mental structures | Philosophy of science | Scientific method | Theories | Greek loanwords | Concepts

Study it well there will be a test on tuesday

Class dismissed

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 08:37 PM  7 years agoPost 5955
Thomas L Erb

rrKey Veteran

Alliance ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Sorry I forgot to tell you if you want the underlined version just let me know and I will underline the important parts for you

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 08:38 PM  7 years agoPost 5956
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

read it a long time ago

difference is, I comprehend it

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 08:50 PM  7 years agoPost 5957
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Chronometric Dating
Dendrochronology.
Florine absorption.
Oxidizeable carbon dating.
Rehydroxylation dating.
Iodine-xenon dating
Obsidian hydration dating
Radiometric dating
Argon–argon dating
K–Ar dating
Helium dating
Isochron dating
Radiocarbon dating
Rubidium-strontium dating
Samarium-neodymium dating
Uranium-lead dating
Uranium-thorium dating
Uranium-uranium dating
Fission track dating
Cosmogenic radionuclide dating
Rhenium-osmium dating
Rubidium-strontium dating
Optical dating
Spectrum analysis.
etc, etc, etc....

Now, the amazing thing is. All these methods confirm each other.
Isn't physics great!!

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 08:55 PM  7 years agoPost 5958
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

this is hillarious its a battle of education VS cranky old uneducated men

you old guys are killing me LOL

once your in the line ready to push daisy's you grab on to that religion with both hands in desperation of loosing what you lived so long to achieve, once you take that last breath you'll find out.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 09:47 PM  7 years agoPost 5959
Rogman88

rrElite Veteran

West Monroe, LA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

So where did the number 3.5 billion years come from? You said it's not up for debate. What is your proof that it's not 3 billion, 2 billion, or 10,000 years old?

High Voltage just works better

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR
05-14-2011 09:51 PM  7 years agoPost 5960
Thomas L Erb

rrKey Veteran

Alliance ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

this is hillarious its a battle of education VS cranky old uneducated men
Yea we know you are a legend in your own mind

This is not up for debate! As you say

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
WATCH
 711 pages [ <<    <     297     ( 298 )     299     NEXT    >> ] 326364 views TOPIC CLOSED
HomeOff Topics News & Politics › God Did Create Mankind.
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 30  Topic Subscribe

Monday, November 19 - 9:03 am - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

The RC discussion world needs to consolidate. RR is now one choice for that. Its software is cutting edge. It hosts on-topic advertising. Help RR increase traffic buy making suggestions, posting in RR's new areas (sites) and by spreading the word.

The RunRyder Difference

• Category system to allow Rep/Vendor postings.
• Classifieds with sold (hidden) category.
• Classifieds with separate view new.
• Answer PMs offsite via email reply.
• Member gallery photos with advanced scripting.
• Gallery photo viewer integrated into postings.
• Highly refined search with advanced back end.
• Hosts its own high end fast response servers.
• Hosts thousands of HD event coverage videos.
• Rewrote entire code base with latest technology.
• No off-topic (annoying) click bait advertising.
Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online