VA pride

I honestly could not vote for a candidate that is a fundamentalist or one whom holds a strong belief/faith in creationism. It says a lot about their rationality and judgment.
 
There is enough evidence toward the scientific end that creationism is an irrational choice. You seek the evidence, it's how one learns how things work.

I agree that scientific evidence disputes most of creationism. I just want to see said evidence besides the age-old Darwin, big bang, and evolution theories.

My point still stands. There will always be an argument for both sides, and either side saying the other is wrong is just two sides of the same coin.

If we're going to speak about firm, concrete, hard evidence then let's see it; for both sides. Until this evidence is presented for all the world to see, none of us have a leg to stand on. Only theories.
 
I agree that scientific evidence disputes most of creationism. I just want to see said evidence besides the age-old Darwin, big bang, and evolution theories.

My point still stands. There will always be an argument for both sides, and either side saying the other is wrong is just two sides of the same coin.

If we're going to speak about firm, concrete, hard evidence then let's see it; for both sides. Until this evidence is presented for all the world to see, none of us have a leg to stand on. Only theories.

Religious arguments are circular and constantly revisit the shit arguments we have all heard for many years.
 
If we're going to speak about firm, concrete, hard evidence then let's see it; for both sides. Until this evidence is presented for all the world to see, none of us have a leg to stand on. Only theories.

This is the essence of science - there is no hard proof, only theories. All we get to go by in life are clues about how things are, and we interpret those clues in varied ways. Religion sticks to a strict interpretation of those clues (and a different interpretation for each religion), whereas we developed science as a way of testing which interpretations are valid.
 
You used the word theory incorrectly.

The word theory has a number of distinct meanings in different fields of knowledge, depending on their methodologies and the context of discussion.

In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behaviour are Newton's theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and general relativity.

In common usage, the word theory is often used to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. This usage of theory leads to the common incorrect statement "It's not a fact, it's only a theory." True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them. In this usage, the word is synonymous with hypothesis.

In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from or is supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations, and is predictive, logical, and testable. In principle, scientific theories are always tentative, and subject to corrections or inclusion in a yet wider theory. Commonly, a large number of more specific hypotheses may be logically bound together by just one or two theories.
 
you all are forgetting the important thing, this guy thinks the world is 6000 years old and the first woman was made from a rib! he's a fucking wackjob!
 
This is the essence of science - there is no hard proof, only theories. All we get to go by in life are clues about how things are, and we interpret those clues in varied ways. Religion sticks to a strict interpretation of those clues (and a different interpretation for each religion), whereas we developed science as a way of testing which interpretations are valid.

The word is hypothesis, not theory.

It would be one thing if the word theory wasn't used to mean theory anymore but to mean hypothesis, but it's still used in the correct manner, so you'd be well advised to use it correctly.
 
We should lynch the common usage fags and force them to watch Bill Nye the Science Guy music videos until they crack!
 
The word is hypothesis, not theory.

It would be one thing if the word theory wasn't used to mean theory anymore but to mean hypothesis, but it's still used in the correct manner, so you'd be well advised to use it correctly.

in this context I mean "hypothesis that has been validated by so many experiments that it is taken as truth"
 
*I put on my robe and science hat*
ev6tkz.jpg