Philosophy Now Forum

Khalid wrote:You mean chimps evolved from Adam and Eve ?

you know that scripture doesnt have to be taken literally, right?

Evolution theory is not a fact . Hundreds of scientists are denying and demolishing it . It's enough to search google to see the dispute about that theory ..

everything in science is a theory

gravity is a theory

evolution is the best available explanation that fits observations - that is what a theory is

but there are no observations - zero none nada zilich squat etc - for creationism

note that even if there was no evidence for evolution at all there would still be no evidence for creationism

you really should read an intro to philosophy book or something

calling yourself a scientist no more makes one a scientist any more than putting on a pink dress-up gown and tiara and prancing around saying 'i am a princess i am a princess' makes one a princess

Kayla wrote: calling yourself a scientist no more makes one a scientist any more than putting on a pink dress-up gown and tiara and prancing around saying 'i am a princess i am a princess' makes one a princess

Of course there are scientists who don't believe in evolution theory, but this is totally different from the statement "evolution theory is not widely accepted in science", which is untrue. Are there even scientific publications (from a respected journal) that oppose evolution theory? If so, I would like to read them.

Kayla wrote: gravity is a theory

The aforementioned Church of the Flying Spaghettimonster also has a good explanation for gravity: it is actually He who pushes things down with His noodly appendages.

lennartack wrote:

Kayla wrote: calling yourself a scientist no more makes one a scientist any more than putting on a pink dress-up gown and tiara and prancing around saying 'i am a princess i am a princess' makes one a princess

Of course there are scientists who don't believe in evolution theory, but this is totally different from the statement "evolution theory is not widely accepted in science", which is untrue. Are there even scientific publications (from a respected journal) that oppose evolution theory? If so, I would like to read them.

How many scientists don't accept the theory of evolution?

chaz wyman wrote:

lennartack wrote:

Kayla wrote: calling yourself a scientist no more makes one a scientist any more than putting on a pink dress-up gown and tiara and prancing around saying 'i am a princess i am a princess' makes one a princess

Of course there are scientists who don't believe in evolution theory, but this is totally different from the statement "evolution theory is not widely accepted in science", which is untrue. Are there even scientific publications (from a respected journal) that oppose evolution theory? If so, I would like to read them.

How many scientists don't accept the theory of evolution?

Wikipedia wrote: In response, creationists have disputed the level of scientific support for evolution. The Discovery Institute has gathered over 600 scientists since 2001 to sign "A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism" in order to show that there are a number of scientists who dispute what they refer to as "Darwinian evolution". This statement did not profess outright disbelief in evolution, but expressed skepticism as to the ability of "random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life." Several counter-petitions have been launched in turn, including A Scientific Support for Darwinism, which gathered over 7,000 signatures in four days, and Project Steve, a tongue-in-cheek petition that has gathered 1,151 (as of January 18, 2011) evolution-supporting scientists named "Steve".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objections ... acceptance

lennartack wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

lennartack wrote: Of course there are scientists who don't believe in evolution theory, but this is totally different from the statement "evolution theory is not widely accepted in science", which is untrue. Are there even scientific publications (from a respected journal) that oppose evolution theory? If so, I would like to read them.

How many scientists don't accept the theory of evolution?

Wikipedia wrote: In response, creationists have disputed the level of scientific support for evolution. The Discovery Institute has gathered over 600 scientists since 2001 to sign "A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism" in order to show that there are a number of scientists who dispute what they refer to as "Darwinian evolution". This statement did not profess outright disbelief in evolution, but expressed skepticism as to the ability of "random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life." Several counter-petitions have been launched in turn, including A Scientific Support for Darwinism, which gathered over 7,000 signatures in four days, and Project Steve, a tongue-in-cheek petition that has gathered 1,151 (as of January 18, 2011) evolution-supporting scientists named "Steve".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objections ... acceptance

On this issue "random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life." you can still be a 100% Darwinist and hold that this is going too far.
Darwin's account talks about infinite diversity, which evolution can account for but need not explain. It shows that there is diversity, but that this diversity needs not be explained in terms of survivability. Thousands of traits can exist that have neutral or even negative impacts on survival just so long as they do not stop the organism from having viable progeny
Today's big problem with people who are evolutionist but do not accept some of the extreme attempts at explanation of every little minor variation can be termed Darwinitis.
I image that at least some of these "skeptics" object on this level rather than on the whole picture - its a matter of emphasis and interpretation.

lennartack wrote:

Wikipedia wrote: In response, creationists have disputed the level of scientific support for evolution. The Discovery Institute has gathered over 600 scientists since 2001 to sign "A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism" in order to show that there are a number of scientists who dispute what they refer to as "Darwinian evolution". This statement did not profess outright disbelief in evolution, but expressed skepticism as to the ability of "random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life." Several counter-petitions have been launched in turn, including A Scientific Support for Darwinism, which gathered over 7,000 signatures in four days, and Project Steve, a tongue-in-cheek petition that has gathered 1,151 (as of January 18, 2011) evolution-supporting scientists named "Steve".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objections ... acceptance

A tiny number in predominantly unrelated fields though.

Anti-evolutionists (creationist and Id adherents) are attempting to promote the idea of dissent to the public but there is no significant dissent on the general idea within the scientific community.

With respect to you all , I'm not going to discuss evolution theory . As long as we all agree it's a theory not a fact , then I'll stay a believer in what's written in the old books of Torah , bible and Quran about mankind ancestor .

Khalid wrote:As long as we all agree it's a theory not a fact

The meaning of "theory" in scientific terms is commonly misunderstood and it is not the same as speculation. A scientific theory is explanatory whilst a scientific law is descriptive. Therefore the law of gravity describes how gravity affects objects (it is descriptive) but a theory of gravity attempts to explain why gravity works as it does (it is explanatory).

Claiming that evolution is only a theory to somehow give the impression that scientists are only guessing is either a display if ignorance or dishonesty.

The causes of evolution may be subject to debate but it is a fact that evolution takes place.

Khalid wrote:With respect to you all , I'm not going to discuss evolution theory . As long as we all agree it's a theory not a fact , then I'll stay a believer in what's written in the old books of Torah , bible and Quran about mankind ancestor .

From a science point of view evolution is a fact. That does not mean you can't believe in creation, nor that evolution is undeniably true, only that it's not possible to prove religion with science, which you tried in another thread. Literal interpretation of the Bible/Koran contradicts science on just too many points.

People often regard science as the ultimate source for truth. It would be smart if religious people like you took it differently and recognize the subjectivity of truth. It would also be the only way to be credible. There are many religious scientists perfectly capable of believing evolution at work and believing creation at home. It would be of no use if they brought religion to science, since religion is not going to help us move forward in our knowledge.

http://www.examiner.com/article/living- ... ion-theory
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEsMXah1Gfw
http://harunyahya.com/en/works/2446/
http://www.uberrock.co.uk/cd-reviews/32 ... cords.html

I don't know why every time I write "evolution theory demolition" on google I find millions of articles denying that explanatory theory .

Anyway philosophers , can you explain how Muhammad knew this :

With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace. 60:47

How did he know that the universe expands , it's recently discovered and a very complicated astronomical fact . I wish find an explanation here .

Another question :

And how many Signs in the heavens and the earth do they pass by? Yet they turn (their faces) away from them!

How did he know that mankind will have space ships to reach the heavens ?

12.Man We did create from a quintessence (of clay);

13 . Then We placed him as (a drop of) sperm in a place of rest, firmly fixed;

14 . Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump; then we made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then we developed out of it another creature.So blessed be Allah, the best to create!

Scientists say this description is perfectly accurate . The word clot of congealed blood can't have another medical name or description .

So how did an illiterate man know all this ? And how did he have the courage to say Soon will We show them our Signs in the (furthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things? ? how did he get such courage to make all these challenges ?

Khalid wrote:I don't know why every time I write "evolution theory demolition" on google I find millions of articles denying that explanatory theory .

Hits on Google:

"evoluton theory demolition" 14,800,000
"evolution is true" 302,000,000
"the earth is definitely flat" 55,900,000
"Spongebob is god" 33,400,00
"jfk shot himself" 39,400,000
"john is the greatest guy on earth" 198,000,000
"don't believe everything you read" 176,000,000

Choose your sources better or you'll look stupid.

Khalid wrote:With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace. 60:47

How did he know that the universe expands , it's recently discovered and a very complicated astronomical fact . I wish find an explanation here .[/quote]

It says that space is vast. Where does it say that it expands?

Khalid wrote:And how many Signs in the heavens and the earth do they pass by? Yet they turn (their faces) away from them!

How did he know that mankind will have space ships to reach the heavens ? [/quote]

This is a bizarre interpretation. It seems more like an advert for astrology than a prophesy of spaceships.

Khalid wrote:

12.Man We did create from a quintessence (of clay);

13 . Then We placed him as (a drop of) sperm in a place of rest, firmly fixed;

14 . Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump; then we made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then we developed out of it another creature.So blessed be Allah, the best to create!

Scientists say this description is perfectly accurate . The word clot of congealed blood can't have another medical name or description .

What special claim are you making? That people didn't know that the ejaculate of men caused women to become pregnant and pregnancy lead to the birth of a human child?

Khalid wrote:So how did an illiterate man know all this ? And how did he have the courage to say Soon will We show them our Signs in the (furthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things? ? how did he get such courage to make all these challenges ?

How did an illiterate man write anything at all never mind "know all this"?

John wrote: It says that space is vast. Where does it say that it expands?

It's says we created it's vastness . Anyway this is another translation of the verse : (With power did We construct the heaven. Verily, We are Able to extend the vastness of space thereof.)

This is a bizarre interpretation. It seems more like an advert for astrology than a prophesy of spaceships.

What if Gas energy didn't exist underneath the surface , what if we simply didn't manage to invent and devise things like engines , mechanical engineering , plans and other shapes of technology we have today . Such a verse wouldn't make any meaning ever . But to say clearly that we gonna pass by the heavens and seeing signs in it . Nasa is the fastest thing came to my mind .

What special claim are you making? That people didn't know that the ejaculate of men caused women to become pregnant and pregnancy lead to the birth of a human child?

No but I said the word "a clot of congealed blood" looks extraordinary according to scientists . And how did he know what happens inside and stating them in exact order . Then We made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; then of that clot We made a (foetus) lump; then we made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then we developed out of it another creature.So blessed be Allah, the best to create! . Why isn't there a mistake according to today's medicine ?

John wrote:

Khalid wrote:I don't know why every time I write "evolution theory demolition" on google I find millions of articles denying that explanatory theory .

Hits on Google:

"evoluton theory demolition" 14,800,000
"evolution is true" 302,000,000
"the earth is definitely flat" 55,900,000
"Spongebob is god" 33,400,00
"jfk shot himself" 39,400,000
"john is the greatest guy on earth" 198,000,000
"don't believe everything you read" 176,000,000

Choose your sources better or you'll look stupid.

Anyway Islam doesn't completely oppose evolution theory . Islam only opposes the relation between man and monkey part . But the natural selection part atleast not denied in the Quran , I remember I heard that it's even confirmed in a verse .