Jeanniebean, it's obvious to me that you and I have no common ground where we could meet in the middle. Evolution has more proof than anything else because people have argued about it so much over the years. There's more proof for evolution than there is of Newton's Laws of Gravity. When genetics was discovered (a science Darwin never dreamed of) it lined up exactly the way evolution predicted it would. Even if you throw out the fossil record, there is still more evidence supporting evolution than any other scientific theory in history.

Evolution is, indeed, a fact and that is not an opinion, it is the truth.

And truth is what it comes down to. There aren't different versions of the truth. There is only one truth. We know the truth because all the evidence supports it.

I'm not saying there are no souls. I'm saying there isn't any good supporting evidence for them and therefore I don't believe in them. Show me some good, solid evidence and I'll change my mind. I'm open minded that way.

You, on the other hand are not open minded. No matter how much evidence there is supporting a view different from the one you hold, you refuse to consider it.

This is why I think discussions like this one don't belong in this forum. It should be in the strange phenomenon forum because there's no evidence supporting it.

We could start by you attempting to answer this question:

"If you and I were the only two people in the entire universe and I saw something you could not see, or you saw something I could not see.... then who is seeing the "true" reality?"

You or me? If what we see is different, which is to be called "truth?"

****************************************************




Science has not even scratched the surface of evolution. I am not saying there is no truth to it, I am saying that the theory as it stands is on going. It is still being worked out. It is still theory. I would not call it "fact." We are still working on it. That's all I am saying. There is a lot more that science does not know about evolution.



Well there is certainly a man created "theory of evolution" and that is a fact. But it is not complete or accurate. Like I said, it has a long way to go, and the direction it is headed will lead to a dead end.



Yes there is only one truth. But no one knows what it is because no one can see the whole of it. Each person has a different point of view of reality from their personal perspective. No one can know the truth.



All you are saying is that you have chosen only to believe in what other people have decided is a fact or what there is evidence enough for. You depend upon agreement with others rather than on your own experience and feelings. That's your choice. Perhaps you doubt yourself and perhaps you doubt your own personal experiences.



Completely wrong. I have spend eternity considering other people's views and supporting evidence. I continue to consider them, always. They simply do not out weigh my own personal experience and feelings on the matter.




Well I don't know why it matters what forum it is in. It could be in the religious forum too. Immortality is the subject. I don't know why people can't simply discuss a topic without having to sort out what forum it should be in. Why must we separate everything?

We separate the mind from the heart and soul. We separate science from personal experience. We separate politics from religion and yet these things always over lap. Don't don't worry about what forum it should be in.

I can see we have a problem with semantics. When a scientist uses the word theory he's talking about something that well established.

You're are confusing a theory with a hypothesis. A hypothesis is an idea that may explain something but doesn't have enough evidence to support it. It may be proven right or it may be proven wrong. The god particle was a hypothesis predicted by another theory. They knew it had to be there or we were very wrong about the nature or the universe. So, they went looking for it and found it. This is more evidence to support the theory that suggested it in the first place.

That's how we know a good theory, it accurately predicts something that couldn't otherwise be predicted.

Scientists don't use the term law anymore because so many of the so called laws have now been proven wrong. Newton's Laws of Gravity are a prime example. Einstein gave us better ideas about gravity than Newton.

Where a topic is discussed matters because some people are interested in certain subjects and not others. I have no interest in souls, ghosts, alien abductions or the like. I am interested in hard science and philosophy though.

I do not believe something because it's popular. If I did I'd likely think more like you do. I believe evidence. My senses could lie to me, so I don't trust them completely.

Oh geeeze give me a little credit. I know what a theory is and how it differs from an hypothesis.

But no matter what, a "theory" is not a "fact." If "evolution" as it is currently written, were a "fact" then they would not still be calling it a "theory."

Some kind of evolution, I am sure, is a fact. But our current theory is only scratching the surface, IMO.

I am not trying to say that we did not "evolve" in some way, I am simply saying that science has not TOUCHED THE SURFACE OF THAT particular THEORY. And it is MY BELIEF that the direction they are going with some of their hypothesis about and within the theory of evolution will lead them to a dead end. Period... and that's my opinion.

But this topic is not about evolution.



Yes I know that. I also know that inside of the theory of evolution, there are many hypothesis and speculation and assumptions that have not been proven. That is not to say that evolution of some kind did not happen.




I don't think so. The only reports I ever read was that they "think" or that they "may have" found it. I don't believe they did. I don't believe they have any proof that they found any such particle.

What I believe about their claim that they found the Higgs Bosen is that it is only their wishful thinking -- if not just a baldfaced lie to justify the billions of tax payers dollars they spent on that machine.




There is nothing wrong with that. I appreciate real evidence also. And I don't really "BELIEVE" anything. I am actually more of a skeptic than you are.

I do believe in the possibility, and I do trust my instincts and feelings more than most authority.

Ask any biologist and he'll tell you that evolution is indeed a fact. As I said, we have more evidence supporting it than any other theory in history.

Name just one hole you think it has and I'll explain it.

Darwin told us exactly what it would take to disprove evolution. Irreducible complexity. And in over 150 years no one has come up with a single example of it.

This thread is not about evolution. You brought it up and called it a fact.

I am not going to argue with that statement. What I said is that our current knowledge/theory of evolution is incomplete and headed towards a dead end. It barely scratches the surface of the truth about where we came from and how we got here.

So if you want to keep insisting that evolution is a fact, what ever that statement means to you, fine.

A hole? How about evidence on the evolutionary path of the flying reptile they call Pterodactyl. What did it evolve from, how did it develop wings, and where is the evidence?

All flying creatures evolved from animals that lived in trees. First they were only able to climb. Later they were able to parachute, then glide and eventually fly. This was a survival advantage. If you could fall from a great hight and survive you were more likely to pass on your genes to the next genertion.

We don't need a fossil record to prove this because we have other records of other animals evolving along the same path. Bat ancestors were once very much like flying squirrels are today.

Buy the way, this isn't a hole. It's simply a gap in the fossil record. Just because a few parts are missing it doesn't mean the puzzle is wrong.

I have to go to bed now. Gotta be driving before 4 in the morning.

Again, I have not said that evolution is not a decent theory. I said that it is headed towards a dead end ultimately where there are too many really important questions that go unanswered.

It is interesting, but it is not the answer to the big question. How does it happen? Survival of the fittest is not going to cut it.

Too many huge gaps between prehistoric mankind and modern humans.

The theory still barely scratches the surface, and scientists speak of it as if they have solved all the great questions of our existence. It's laughable.

Why We Age - And How We Can Stop It

Interesting but no real answers on how to stop aging...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqCo-McgHLw

The only reason you say that is because you don't fully understand it. There's more to evolution than survival of the fittest. There's a whole other branch called sexual selection that explains things like male peacock's tails. Peacock tails are cumbersome and are actually a disadvantage when trying to escape a predator. But, sexual selection explains how they evolved.

If you really want to learn about it here's an outstanding book.

I didn't claim to be an expert on evolution and that isn't what this thread is about anyway.

I have too many books to read as it is already and I'll probably never get through them all. I'm sure it is interesting. If I run across that book and it's not too expensive I will get it.

But I am pretty sure it doesn't answer the really big questions that I would have. I suppose for some people it is enough.

Yeah, like the whole scientific community.

BTW you were the one that made evolution an issue in this thread. I simply posted a quote to make a point about something else that included the word evolution.

As for the topic, I stand by my first post.

So what you are saying is that they don't really have proof or actual "evidence," they just have what they believe is a good reason to speculate and assume things.

Sort of like my not having any proof of aliens mutilating cows. It doesn't matter as long as I have enough evidence to suggest that is what probably happened.

That is what evidence for evolution does. It suggests that this may have happened.... even though they don't have actual fossil evidence to back it up.





A few parts missing. You have no idea. There are tons of parts missing.

Guessing and assuming is still just speculation. Convincing? Perhaps to some. Absolute proof? Not even close.

I made it an issue after you made the statement that evolution was a fact. Keeping silent on the matter might have implied that I accept your opinion as truth.

But you brought it up first.

The study of theory of evolution is a never ending one. People talk about it as if the entire subject has been figured out and proven in detail. I simply don't buy that.

The questions that I would like to see asked is how? What process happens in nature and how does it happen that causes one creature to change into another? Trial and error, survival of the fittest is not a practical or logical or believable answer. There must be something else going on that scientists are ignoring or just not seeing.

No, I quoted a TV show. I was making a point that had nothing to do with evolution. I said you remind me of Sheldon's mom and I gave a quote (that mentioned evolution) to illustrate why.

Go back and read it.

I don't have to go back and read it. I said I agreed with Sheldon's mom. Its an opinion.


Then you said it was a fact.

You said:

I don't understand. If we achieve immortality, we will never die so why be afraid of rotting in the ground? And, even if you did rot in the ground, you wouldn't know it or feel anything so it doesn't sound very scary to me.

And, finally, I don't understand why there would be no religion if we did discover a means of becoming immortal. I don't think very many people choose to be religious due to the possibility of heaven or hell. At least, that's not why I'm religious so I'm guessing about others. I guess I could be wrong about that.

Good points.

If you believe in an immortal soul, it is only YOUR BODY that will be "rotting in the ground."

If the body is eventually made to be immortal, constantly renewing itself, growing back limbs and organs, etc. what happens if someone WANTS TO DIE?

Will we (our souls) be eternally trapped inside of our fleshy bodies?
Will we (our soul) be able to get out or change our body for a new body? (That would be cool.)

So it depends on what your concept of the self actually is. Are we spiritual beings or just flesh with brains?


The age old question "What am I?" is still unanswered.

Hard core scientists will insist that we are just living flesh that has somehow, by some miracle become self aware having evolved from the ocean slime.

That was after you made it an issue.



I am a complex series of algorithms.