RunRyder RC
WATCH
 4 pages [ <<    <    ( 1 )     2      3     NEXT    >> ] 1929 views POST REPLY
HomeOff Topics News & Politics › Is "Scientific Theory" Fact? - Of course not
03-11-2014 09:11 PM  4 years agoPost 1
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Is "Scientific Theory" Fact? - Of course not

Scientific Theory

A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. Basically, if evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, then the hypothesis can become accepted as a good explanation of a phenomenon. One definition of a theory is to say it's an accepted hypothesis.

Example: It is known that on June 30, 1908 in Tunguska, Siberia, there was an explosion equivalent to the detonation of about 15 million tons of TNT. Many hypotheses have been proposed for what caused the explosion. It is theorized that the explosion was caused by a natural extraterrestrial phenomenon, and was not caused by man. Is this theory a fact? No. The event is a recorded fact. Is this this theory generally accepted to be true, based on evidence to-date? Yes. Can this theory be shown to be false and be discarded? Yes.

http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemi...a/lawtheory.htm

Hypotheses

hy·poth·e·sis
hīˈpäTHÉ™sis/
noun
plural noun: hypotheses

1.
a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation.
"professional astronomers attacked him for popularizing an unconfirmed hypothesis
"

https://www.google.com/search?q=hyp...ox-a&channel=sb

Liberty once lost, is lost forever.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:19 PM  4 years agoPost 2
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Some theories can become fact.

Or there are facts surrounding these theories.

below they are talking about factual evidence collected as whole has now produced facts, and they are explained clearly.

IAP - IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution

We agree that the following evidence-based facts

about the origins and evolution of the Earth and of life on this planet have been established by numerous observations and independently derived experimental results from a multitude of scientific disciplines. Even if there are still many open questions about the precise details of evolutionary change, scientific evidence has never contradicted these results:
•In a universe that has evolved towards its present configuration for some 11 to 15 billion years, our Earth formed approximately 4.5 billion years ago.
•Since its formation, the Earth – its geology and its environments – has changed under the effect of numerous physical and chemical forces and continues to do so.
•Life appeared on Earth at least 2.5 billion years ago. The evolution, soon after, of photosynthetic organisms enabled, from at least 2 billion years ago, the slow transformation of the atmosphere to one containing substantial quantities of oxygen. In addition to the release of the oxygen that we breathe, the process of photosynthesis is the ultimate source of fixed energy and food upon which human life on the planet depends.
•Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin.

Above is 68 national science academies including the USA

If you denounce these, you are a terrorist

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:23 PM  4 years agoPost 3
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Above is 68 national science academies including the USA

If you denounce these, you are a terrorist
If anyone supports any "Scientific Theory" as fact, then they are uneducated screwballs, most likely a little turd atheist and with zero credentials to make such claims.

Much like yourself.

Liberty once lost, is lost forever.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:24 PM  4 years agoPost 4
Life_Nerd

rrVeteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

From your same source

Debating evolution is not just for the classroom anymore. This controversial science topic is argued over and over again just about anywhere. The mainstream media likes to hype up the "war" between the anti-evolution faction and those who do believe in the Theory of Evolution. Many people refuse to believe in the scientific Theory of Evolution through Natural Selection due to religious or other held beliefs that seem to conflict with the Theory. However, many of their arguments against evolution are nothing more than common misconceptions or misunderstood facts. Therefore, it is important to be armed with enough knowledge to win a debate about evolution.

All debates should strive to be civil, respectful, and based on facts and not the heat of the moment or opinions. Therefore, to prepare for a debate on evolution, whether it is an assignment for a class or just a casual conversation with an acquaintance, it is important to be armed with as many facts as possible. One way to win the debate is to anticipate which arguments the other side will present and be ready with facts to dispel any myths. With evolution, there are many misconceptions that anti-evolution arguments are based off of. Knowing why they are misconceptions and being able to show them as the wrong idea can help win the debate.

Argument Against Evolution: "Evolution is just a theory."

How to Debate the Argument: This is a pretty common phrase that is thrown around when debating evolution or listening to someone explain why you shouldn't believe in the Theory of Evolution. Luckily, this is one misconception that is pretty easy to argue and really can't be debated further by the other side once you have pointed out their ignorance on the real definition of the word "theory".

The word "theory" in science has a very different definition than the way the word theory is used in every day language. The definition of the word "theory" in science is a group of related hypotheses that have been extensively tested and have a large amount of evidence to back them up. A theory has held true over a long period of time and has not been disproven. A "theory" in every day talk is actually more similar to what a hypothesis is in science terms. Most people use the word to mean an educated guess or even just a regular guess with no type of evidence to back it up. A scientific theory can be considered a fact.

When an opponent in the evolution debate says that evolution is "just a theory", it is clear they do not understand the meaning of the scientific term "theory". By pointing out their mistake, this argument becomes unusable as a way to debate against evolution. After all, gravity is "just a theory" but no one ever starts a debate about how valid gravity is. Other theories that are never really debated include the Cell Theory and the Atomic Theory. In some readily accepted theories, there is actually less evidence available to support it than there is for the Theory of Evolution.

Using the argument that evolution is "just a theory" can only be used if the person asserting that anything that is "just a theory" isn't in some way true, so point out all of the other scientific theories and ask them if they are saying that all of those are also not true. If they do actually agree then that none of the theories are true, ask them for what they do believe to be true about those other theories or what the alternative to them are. It will be very rare you find someone ready to argue that point because it makes very little sense. If that happens, they are most likely just trying to save face and don't really believe it themselves.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:29 PM  4 years agoPost 5
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The word "theory" in science has a very different definition than the way the word theory is used in every day language. The definition of the word "theory" in science is a group of related hypotheses that have been extensively tested and have a large amount of evidence to back them up. A theory has held true over a long period of time and has not been disproven. A "theory" in every day talk is actually more similar to what a hypothesis is in science terms. Most people use the word to mean an educated guess or even just a regular guess with no type of evidence to back it up. A scientific theory can be considered a fact.
It sure can.

At least until further scientific discoveries are made to dispel the old "Theories"

Happens all the time in science.

Liberty once lost, is lost forever.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:29 PM  4 years agoPost 6
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

If anyone supports any "Scientific Theory" as fact, then they are uneducated screwballs, most likely a little turd atheist and with zero credentials to make such claims.

Much like yourself.
Attacking the messenger because you cannot refute the message wont help you.

Your a terrorist, not successful but you attack science in the USA.

That means your a retard.

It takes Facts to produce theories.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:31 PM  4 years agoPost 7
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

It sure can.

At least until further scientific discoveries are made to dispel the old "Theories"

Happens all the time in science.
Some things will never be overturned.

Gravity
Evolution
Age of the Earth

Will never be overturned, Evolution has only been added to and just now considered fact. that means it cannot be overturned.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:32 PM  4 years agoPost 8
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Your a terrorist, not successful but you attack science in the USA.
Science is fine.

Its uneducated screwball, little atheist turds that claim to know more than they are built to know that are brain damaged and should be avoided like the plague.

that means it cannot be overturned.
That claim affirms the above.

Liberty once lost, is lost forever.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:33 PM  4 years agoPost 9
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Hey you terrorist.

Attack the facts, go ahead and try.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:35 PM  4 years agoPost 10
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Attack the facts, go ahead and try.
I have already attacked YOUR "facts"

As far as opinions, there are plenty for both sides on the Internet.

Have you ever heard of Google?

Duh.

Liberty once lost, is lost forever.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:39 PM  4 years agoPost 11
Life_Nerd

rrVeteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

At least until further scientific discoveries are made to dispel the old "Theories"
That is correct. Scientific Theories or open to be disproved. They are not Laws.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:46 PM  4 years agoPost 12
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

That is correct. Scientific Theories or open to be disproved. They are not Laws.
And, thats a fact jack.

Liberty once lost, is lost forever.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:50 PM  4 years agoPost 13
unclejane

rrElite Veteran

santa fe, NM, USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Is the existence of the Christian god a "fact"? I wonder if that's "settled science"?

What's the difference between the "fact" of the existence of the Christian god (according to Christians) and a "fact" arrived at through science?

LS

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:54 PM  4 years agoPost 14
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Is the existence of the Christian god a "fact"? I wonder if that's "settled science"?
Of course its not.

What makes you think it is?

What's the difference between the "fact" of the existence of the Christian god (according to Christians) and a "fact" arrived at through science?
Its called "Faith"

"Faith" itself can be considered evidence of its own.

"Faith" nothing what so ever to do with "Fact"

Those are 2 separate animals.

Idiot.

Liberty once lost, is lost forever.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 09:59 PM  4 years agoPost 15
outhouse

rrVeteran

auburn ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Faith" itself can be considered evidence of its own.
retard.

faith is a opinion with no evidence

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 10:00 PM  4 years agoPost 16
unclejane

rrElite Veteran

santa fe, NM, USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Of course its not.
What makes you think it is?
The Christian claim that it positively exists. Are you saying the existence of your God is doubtful? And can be disproven?
Its called "Faith"
"Faith" itself can be considered evidence of its own.
"Faith" nothing what so ever to do with "Fact"
Those are 2 separate animals.
So "Faith" is ? Describe it. What about faith:
- makes the existence of your god "unsettled science" and therefore open to being disproved.
- makes its existence not "factual".

Is it a reliable indicator of the existence of your god at all?

LS

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 10:04 PM  4 years agoPost 17
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

faith is a opinion with no evidence
Its far more than just an opinion idiot.

"Faith" itself is evidence enough for some.

Why?

1) Because they can.
2) Because they can by the rights given to citizens of the USA through Constitutional law and our Bill of Rights.

I would not have it any other way.

Would you?

Liberty once lost, is lost forever.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 10:06 PM  4 years agoPost 18
unclejane

rrElite Veteran

santa fe, NM, USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Its far more than just an opinion idiot.
"Faith" itself is evidence enough for some.
Why?
1) Because they can.
2) Because they can by the rights given to citizens of the USA through Constitutional law and our Bill of Rights.
I would not have it any other way.
Would you?
In other words.... Faith is an opinion without evidence.

LS

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 10:08 PM  4 years agoPost 19
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

In other words.... Faith is an opinion without evidence.
Then so is atheism.

Idiot.

Liberty once lost, is lost forever.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-11-2014 10:09 PM  4 years agoPost 20
unclejane

rrElite Veteran

santa fe, NM, USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Then so is atheism.
Irrelevant (and wrong). Still, "Faith" is nothing but an opinion without evidence.

LS

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 4 pages [ <<    <    ( 1 )     2      3     NEXT    >> ] 1929 views POST REPLY
HomeOff Topics News & Politics › Is "Scientific Theory" Fact? - Of course not
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 3  Topic Subscribe

Sunday, August 19 - 3:00 am - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online