4chan archive /sci/ (index)
similar threads
2013-04-15 12:44 5685092 Anonymous (really.jpg 147x170 41kB)
Why is Evolution professed as undeniable truth even though it is still a theory? If it's a theory, does that not mean that there is no concrete evidence that it's true?

1 min later 5685097 Anonymous (You-keep-using-that-word.jpg 500x420 33kB)
>theory

3 min later 5685102 Anonymous
>>5685097 >>5685100 Riddle me this then, how many years must pass until enough 'genetic mutation' will occur until "humanity" will be unrecognizable from modern humans?

4 min later 5685104 smarter than you (theory.gif 324x89 4kB)


4 min later 5685106 Anonymous
The word "theory" is used differently in science than in casual conversation. From Wikipedia: "A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment." >>5685100 OP phrased it as a question rather than an accusation or displaying some kind of scorn. As such, I think we should be nicer than-- >>5685102 It happens fucking slowly. How much water do you add to a puddle before it's a lake?

7 min later 5685115 Anonymous (1365711094198.png 212x218 62kB)
>>5685106 >It happens fucking slowly. How much water do you add to a puddle before it's a lake? You clearly understand evolution, what an insightful answer. You know what, I'll take your word for the legitimacy of evolution.

8 min later 5685118 Anonymous
> people are actually posting in this thread

8 min later 5685120 Anonymous
>>5685115 You seem angry. My point is, there's no clear point at which one thing is no longer that thing.

8 min later 5685121 Anonymous
>>5685111 So 200 years? That's 2-3 generations, they won't know how we looked.

9 min later 5685122 Anonymous (78411300.jpg 400x300 32kB)
>>5685092 you best be trolling

11 min later 5685125 Anonymous (4408823142_7e77b5d2e0.jpg 500x500 160kB)
>>5685120 >there's no clear point at which one thing is no longer that thing. So we are essentially still: >pic related

13 min later 5685131 Anonymous
>>5685125 We're still apes, just less hair.

14 min later 5685135 Anonymous
>>5685131 Are we homo sapiens or homo erectus?

24 min later 5685171 Anonymous
>>5685135 We're homo sapiens. Homo sapiens (along with all nouns) is just shorthand for a long list of adjectives that describe a thing. In other words, we are still the same thing, but we refer to ourselves differently for purposes of discussion where it's important to specify that we have less hair, are generally smarter, etc.

27 min later 5685180 Anonymous (trex.jpg 246x205 9kB)
>>5685171 >we are still the same thing >we are the same thing as a t rex >mfw I am a t rex

29 min later 5685188 Anonymous
>>5685180 You're pretty similar. Same kingdom, etc., etc. They were probably endothermic too.

32 min later 5685196 Anonymous (George-Costanza-1.jpg 605x454 29kB)
>>5685188 You stopped making sense 4 posts ago.

33 min later 5685201 Anonymous
guys so what do we evolve to next?

38 min later 5685214 Anonymous
>>5685188 >Same kingdom, etc., etc. You dont use 'etc., etc.' after listing one thing. Get off my /sci/

45 min later 5685236 Anonymous
>>5685201 transhumans

51 min later 5685254 Anonymous
>>5685180 i wonder how big was the trex's dick

57 min later 5685276 Anonymous
Evolution models with utmost accuracy how the diversity of life on Earth occured, not what it will lead to, right? I'm not accusing in this case i'm actually asking.

57 min later 5685277 Anonymous
>>5685092 >Still a theory >Eye twitch I know that the first chapter of every elementary, middle school, and high school science textbook is the same. Why do people still have trouble understanding that scientific theories are not comparable to theories in any other circumstance?

58 min later 5685280 Anonymous (Fat kids.jpg 449x317 32kB)
>>5685201 Homo ignavus, the lazy humans... We'll eventually develop denser bone structure to support our disgustingly overweight race who have grown dependent on technology and artificial nourishment.

1 hours later 5685288 Anonymous
>>5685277 >Still falling for the troll You do know that this is the first troll every newfag encounters in /sci/. Why do people still fail to recognize trolls

1 hours later 5685333 Anonymous (1364943612566.jpg 800x586 108kB)
It's a work in progress op. Always in a constant state of interpretation and correction. One does not follow it because its an undeniable "truth" they follow it because it's currently the best option at our disposal to observe and define the physical world. If there exist a better or more complete method than what we currently have then I have no doubt we will either replace it with our own or incorporate it into our own guise and make it more "developed".

1 hours later 5685342 Anonymous
You obviously don't have a clue. There's tons of evidence. For instance, when someone is born they have a range of mutations; small variations in their DNA that weren't inherited from their parents. That alone proves evolution

3 hours later 5685660 Anonymous
Evolution isn't a theory. It's an observable fact. Natural selection is the theory.

4 hours later 5685700 Anonymous
>>5685342 Certainly there is Micro-Evolution. That's why we have so many species of dogs. But Macro-Evolution is a pretty hard to believe for me. The idea that fish evolved into amphibians and then reptiles for example. If there was only one thing imperfect with the creature's species as it was in a state of evolution then it would have died and it's genes would not have passed on.

22 hours later 5687643 Anonymous
>>5685700 Sure it's not provable but doesn't it sound plausible?

22 hours later 5687700 Anonymous
>doesn't it sound plausible? .. the null hypothesis that they are due to chance coupled with presumable evolutionary pathways is rejected with P-value<10^–13 arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1303/130 3.6739.pdf "Our DNA was encoded with messages from that other civilization. They programmed the molecules so that when we reached a certain level of intelligence, we would be able to access their information, and they could therefore "teach" us about ourselves, and how to progress. For life to form by chance is mathematically virtually impossible." -- Francis Crick (possibly on LSD)

22 hours later 5687747 Anonymous
If micro evolution exists than macro evolution exists... how can you say that dogs made small changes in a little amount of time and cant make a big change in a large amount of time. Evolution is a fact, read a book, you will see it all makes sense, this is how we came about in the world. There is not mathematical probability evolution simply does and will happen its a law of the universe, every other life form in the universe has arisen through evolution . Embrace the beautiful truth and blessing to have been birthed in a inanimate cosmos.

23 hours later 5687758 Anonymous
>>5685700 >If there was only one thing imperfect with the creature's species as it was in a state of evolution then it would have died and it's genes would not have passed on. well 99% of all species that have ever lived are extinct today for this reason (also mainly due to mass extinctions) there was probably 100,000 short lived fish species which evolved the physical means to crawl out of the water, but didn't evolve the physical means to absorb oxygen from the air. those species all promptly died out because the individuals that stayed in the water were inferior, since they would have paws instead of fins. then several mutations together created a fish that could waddle around on land and could also breathe air (its also possible that instead of breathing air it could just hold its breath for a very, very long time). it didn't have to do much to gain a massive advantage over its fish cousins; it could eat insect larvae in the mud near the water. in fact we have living relics of this species (if it existed) - the mudfish. the problem with establishing evolutionary paths is that intermediate species don't exist for very long. they quickly evolve to fill a new niche where they have little competition (this is obviously evolutionarily favourable). we have to look at records of species that lived over hundreds of millions of years, and most of the time we have to guess at what the intermediates looked like (those lived hundreds of thousands of years). in very rare cases we actually have direct fossil records of indermediates, which is how we established that avians evolved from lizards there may be certain gaping holes in our picture of the macroevolution of life on earth but the concept is most definatley sound. macroevolution must follow from micro and we can see observe micro.

23 hours later 5687788 Anonymous
>>5685092 >science >truth there's you're mistake OP

23 hours later 5687791 Anonymous
>>5687788 Quit samefag-bumpin your troll thread

23 hours later 5687836 Anonymous
>>5685104 Still not sure why this wasn't /thread.

33 hours later 5688850 Anonymous
>>5687788 Troll harder. Science is the only reliable method of finding truth.

35 hours later 5688915 Anonymous
>>5685121 because there wont be any picutures in the future since giant toad people ate them all, and the internet, and all the caves and books and the drawings you made on that tree one day

35 hours later 5688917 Anonymous
The number of non-sage posts in this thread is astounding. This is probably the most common question regarding evolution. OP is too much of a pleb to even google the definition of the world. Everyone in this thread has been trolled. All serious responses were a waste of your time.

36 hours later 5688948 Anonymous (oAnfA.jpg 875x402 252kB)
>>5685700

36 hours later 5688960 Anonymous
>>5685092 Le master trole 2013

37 hours later 5688970 Anonymous
>>5685092 >theory >no concrete evidence

45 hours later 5689514 Anonymous
>>5688970 Evolution has evidence.

45 hours later 5689528 Anonymous
>>5689514 What evidence? Prove it.

57 hours later 5690832 Anonymous
>>5688917 >This is probably the most common question regarding evolution. The most common question is "Why are there still monkeys?"

57 hours later 5690848 Anonymous
>>5689528 >what evidence >prove it >prove >science >prove >inductive logic >prove >prove For fucks sake, do you even understand that nothing in science can ever be proven? troll thread/10

57 hours later 5690856 Anonymous
>>5689528 Plants. Birds. Bacteria. Insects. Four of the most documented and easily changed life types

57 hours later 5690861 Anonymous
>>5685092 holy shit /a/ why can't you keep your trolling and waifus to yourselves? you are just as bad as ponyfags posting those waifus every fucking where around 4chan. as if shitposting you do on /v/ isn't enough

57 hours later 5690865 Anonymous
>>5685125 >gorillas slowly turning into chimps who slowly turn into negroids who slowly turn caucasian next step is to slowly become asian

57 hours later 5690867 Anonymous
>>5688917 >tfw people are still posting non-sage responses

70 hours later 5691793 Anonymous
>>5689528 >What evidence? The fossil record.

80 hours later 5693228 Anonymous
>>5691793 or the experiments on long term evolution of e coli bacteria

89 hours later 5693830 Anonymous
Evolution is a theory, you're right. It's touted as fact perhaps because it goes well with a humanism philosophy. People want something to believe, usually something they are comfortable with. Most of the proof of evolution is the art in the textbooks. I spoke to a few local scientists that believe in God making the world, and the fossil record, the climate, the math, and the physics seem to be able to be used by both either scientists of evolution or creationism. The only thing that doesn't fit is the evidence of a worldwide flood... massive death in the fossils found anywhere people continue to dig for fossils. That only fits one side for sure. So I suppose the real reason it's touted as fact, is because if it is wrong, then God exists.

89 hours later 5693835 Anonymous
>>5693830 Is there any scientific objection to evolution? I'm sure there must be, but it's being starved of attention by humanists that need to legitimise their worldview.

89 hours later 5693857 Anonymous
>>5685092 everything in science is a theory, there are no facts / thread saging and reporting

90 hours later 5693869 Anonymous
>>5693857 Wrong. There are facts in science, but they are at a lower tier than theory. Facts are documented from observation. In a way, I guess you could think of a natural law as a fact. They don't answer the how or why, they simply state a relationship. Theory is much farther down the line.

90 hours later 5693873 Anonymous
Evolution is not truth, but rather its a model for us to picture the changes in organisms. The line between human->ape is artificial. Just like there are no clear cut distinction between colors (rgb). (1,1,2) is just as black as (1, 5, 4). In a similar way evolution is not truth, but rather a model for classifications. There are thousands->millions of variation between human and apes but we only take snapshots and call those separate snapshots different. If we look at it from start to finish, it will be hard to when apes end and when humans begin.

90 hours later 5693885 Anonymous
The biggest red herring in all these "evolution is just a theory" critiques is that plate techtonics is a theory as well, so is....wait for it....the theory of relativity. Yet christfags and all other haters don't seem to have much a beef with all that. Kind of reveals their true motives for asking the question if you ask me. Why no butthurt over quantum field theory? oh right it doesn't fuck directly with your holy book.

90 hours later 5693893 Anonymous
>>5690867 >tfw it's been 5 days and people are still replying without saging.

90 hours later 5693927 Anonymous
>>5688948 Well played my dear sir.. Well played.

90 hours later 5693935 valjean sage
This is the worst thread.

96 hours later 5694530 Anonymous
>>5693935 Hello valjean. Why is this thread worse in your opinion than all the troll threads?

96 hours later 5694535 Anonymous
>>5694530 This isn't a troll thread?!?!?

96 hours later 5694551 Anonymous
>>5685092 >2013 >doesn't know the difference between hypothesis and theory are you even educated

96 hours later 5694552 Anonymous
>>5694535 >anime picture >vague question that misunderstands very simple scientific principles round these parts this is about as obvious as trolling gets

96 hours later 5694564 Anonymous
Evolution is a simple logical existence if two things are assumed (or proven) 1) The earth is old in the order of magnitude of the billion 2) Genetics, DNA, and genes all exist, your off spring gain traits from you and its other parent

97 hours later 5694569 Anonymous
It doesn't seem odd to you folks that in the same living creature there can be a gene for blue eyes, and a gene for liking blue eyes? That's seems weird to me.

97 hours later 5694610 Anonymous
if evolution is true, how come we don't see fish growing legs anymore?

97 hours later 5694612 Anonymous
>>5694569 that's pretty much same as saying "isn't intraspecies sex weird"? the answer is no

1.589 0.131