header pic

Area51 Board (non-moderated) at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' Scout-Tennessee a51 Crowd- Enjoy ROWDY discussion covering politics, religion, current events, and all things under the sun

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Cesspool of primordial ooze...

 (Read 1425 times)

Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 28764
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #28 on: January 25, 2019, 11:23:55 AM »
No theory is ever "proven" in the sense you use the term.

If you can't follow the difference between these two rocks that may have hit the Earth, I can't help you.  There is nothing inconsistent between the two theories.


VolRage

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 2996
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #29 on: January 25, 2019, 06:09:59 PM »
Science dictates that man "evolved" from apes yet we don't have incremental fossil records or incremental skeletal remains to support the theory. Science dictates that all life formed after the "big bang". Those two theories are WIDELY accepted as scientific fact. Heck, the total amount of atoms in the universe is estimated to be only 1 in 10 to the 79th power but the chances that life can form from none life is around 1 in 10 to the 40,000th power. To give some perspective of the information alone in a cell that would have to form by random chance over time to make macro-evolution possible:
  • One has about 50 trillion cells in the human body.  
  • Each cell has 46 DNA strands.  
  • Each DNA strand is 6 feet long but is wound up in a tiny space.  
  • If unwound and placed next to each other, your DNA would stretch from the Earth to the Moon 5 million round trips. 
  • If that DNA information code was typed out into a book, you could fill the Grand Canyon with those books over 40 times.

I love science when a theory is proven as fact but not when there is an agenda. The Big Bang Theory, Evolution and Man Made Climate Change are "scientific" agendas I won't put much stock in. What I find funny is that the Christian belief in creationism is ridiculed as improbable considering the complexity of the human body yet that same crowd that ridicules has bought the Big Bang and Evolution theories as fact while ignoring the mathematical improbabilities to create something out of nothing. Forgive me if I'm skeptical of "science" and particularly when a theory hasn't been proven yet I'm told it's settled science.

Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 28764
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #30 on: January 25, 2019, 06:16:43 PM »
Can you cite a scientific theory you view as having been proven as a fact?
« Last Edit: January 25, 2019, 06:42:09 PM by Cincydawg »

Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 28764
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #31 on: January 25, 2019, 06:48:34 PM »
Appears some may not realize the difference between a theory and proven science.....
What would you consider as an example of "proven science" in your opinion?
A natural law?  Anything other than the generally recognized natural laws?

Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 28764
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #32 on: January 25, 2019, 06:50:44 PM »
I'd note once again that abiogensis is not at all the same thing as evolution by NS.  The "odds" of an event happening are obviously influenced by how many attempts are made at whatever it is that may have happened.  A thing which has astronomical odds turns into near certainty if enough opportunities over time to do it are available.

A billion attempts per second over a billion years is a large figure that could yield a singularly improbable event.


Drew4UTk

  • Administrator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 5997
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #33 on: January 25, 2019, 06:55:50 PM »
^that sounds suspiciously like the definition of insanity... 

maybe proof we're all crazy?

fuzzynavol

  • seeker of passage
  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 8440
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #34 on: January 25, 2019, 10:46:12 PM »
Science dictates that man "evolved" from apes
 
We didn't evolve from apes - we ARE apes.

yet we don't have incremental fossil records or incremental skeletal remains to support the theory. 

https://naturalhistory.si.edu/exhibits/david-h-koch-hall-human-origins

highVOLtage

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 3081
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #35 on: January 25, 2019, 11:09:09 PM »
"We didn't evolve from apes - we ARE apes."

Some more than others..



Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 28764
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #36 on: January 26, 2019, 07:45:00 AM »
Humans are indeed classified in the group we call Great Apes.  But, I'll ask again, what theory in science do you personally feel is proven?


Hoojang

  • Player
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 664
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #37 on: January 26, 2019, 08:27:27 AM »

Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 28764
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #38 on: January 26, 2019, 08:34:19 AM »
Those theories aren't the product of science obviously.

I was trying to think of a scientific theory that in your mind is proven, but we can take those as examples if you have no others.

I gather you don't think much of science, which is fine, and think somehow it is distorted by politics etc. and of relatively little real value.

fuzzynavol

  • seeker of passage
  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 8440
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #39 on: January 26, 2019, 08:49:17 AM »
Those theories aren't the product of science obviously.


Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 28764
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #40 on: January 26, 2019, 09:00:00 AM »
Those theories, or concepts, have been around for a long long time, and were not figured out using the scientific process.  Isaac Newton, for example, is generally considered not to be a scientist, but a "natural philosopher", to the extent terms matter, because he did not use, nor was he aware of the scientific method.  The same is true for Copernicus, who was clearly not a scientists.

The Egyptians long before either had figured out that the Earth was spherical and approximated its diameter remarkably accurately.  The geocentric model held sway mostly because of Aristotle, who obviously had great weight.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/OrbitsHistory/page1.php

At times, a person like an Aristotle or Newton carry such weight that their ideas suppress consideration of alternatives for a long time.  Newton for example did not advocate the wave nature of light and folks who followed tended to be heavily swayed by his bias.  This likely delayed the acceptance that light has wave properties.

https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/thomas-young-and-the-wave-nature-of-light/

And of course this duality of properties, wave versus particles, later coalesced into something else rather important, yet another major theory in science that has not really been proven in the normal sense of the term.

Scientific theories get tested, not proved.  (In science, to prove means to test.)






Hoojang

  • Player
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 664
  • Liked:
Re: Cesspool of primordial ooze...
« Reply #41 on: January 26, 2019, 09:15:47 AM »
Clairvoyance clearly isn't your strong suit. Disagreement doesn't necessarily mean a lack of interest in a particular topic....
Mathematics and science have produced quite an easy life for those of us that utilizes their products constructively in a most uncivilized and violent world..... 

So many ancient scientists, philosophers, medical practitioners etc., have been proven wrong over the centuries that they do not get automatic acceptance just because their postulation seems to fit with the present norms of the day. Scare tactics and an entire alphabet before and after ones name doesn't make one the ultimate expert and judge. They being human introduces negative variables into their work that must taken into account. NO one is infallible..... 

Surely you jest. The earth being flat the sun circling the earth were the accepted science of the day and considered as fact, until proven wrong.....  

 

Associate Links/Search