nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
→Gravitation is a fact - Evolution is a fact: Rebutall is wrong.
Please NOte: Omnsicience and Omnipotence are mutually exclusive. A being who is omnipotent can change anything, anywhere, any time. A being who is omniscient knows exactly what they will do, even before they do it. Therefore an omniscient being cannot affect their own future actions, without destroying their omniscience, and an omnipotent being must be able to change anything, even something that they themselves have predicted would happen previously. Please remove this section as it does not belong in 'proof'. --[[User:CatWatcher|CatWatcher]] 05:56, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
Please NOte: Omnsicience and Omnipotence are mutually exclusive. A being who is omnipotent can change anything, anywhere, any time. A being who is omniscient knows exactly what they will do, even before they do it. Therefore an omniscient being cannot affect their own future actions, without destroying their omniscience, and an omnipotent being must be able to change anything, even something that they themselves have predicted would happen previously. Please remove this section as it does not belong in 'proof'. --[[User:CatWatcher|CatWatcher]] 05:56, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
== Gravitation is a fact - Evolution is a fact ==
While the ''Theory of Gravitation'' and the ''Theory of Evolution'' are just that - scientific theories. Ed Poor's edit on the page is just confusing these simple ''facts'' :-) , it should be reverted.--[[User:BRichtigen|BRichtigen]] 14:15, 4 November 2008 (EST)
:The [[Theory of Evolution]] is disputed by 5% of scientists, so it's not wise to call it "a fact". Next, you'll be calling the "[[Greenhouse Theory]]" of [[global warming]] a fact too, I suppose.
:Try to distinguish between ideology and science, please. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 14:23, 4 November 2008 (EST)
:: I think what he means is that there are definite changes in species across time and generations... Evolution exists, meaning that genetics and mutations cause traits to change in a species over time - eg skin color, facial features, etc. that distinguish groups within a species. The Theory of Evolution, which attempts to explain the creation of new species through evolution, is a theory, not a fact.[[User:Mikek|Mikek]] 14:28, 4 November 2008 (EST)
::I'd never call a theory a fact. Try to read more carefully, please. --[[User:BRichtigen|BRichtigen]] 14:30, 4 November 2008 (EST)
::: I'm not sure that I agree with Ed Poor's edit, but neither do I agree with BRichtigen's rebuttal. You (BRichtigen) are claiming that Ed Poor is conflating two different concepts (the existence of changes with the explanation of those changes) into the one word, "evolution". Yet you are doing the same sort of thing. You have failed to distinguish between ''observed'' changes within living things due mostly to genetic variation and natural selection and occasionally due to genetic-information-destroying mutations, and ''unobserved'' information-generating mutations that produce new features. You call both of these "evolution" and a fact, yet only the first of these is a fact; the other is a ''belief''. In addition, most people would not even refer to the former as "evolution". When two creatures have offspring, each of the offspring get only half the DNA from each parent. This means that some genetic information in each parent is not passed on. This is why offspring do not look identical to their parents. Yet going by your definition, if this is repeated across all members of the species, then this is evolution! That "evolution" nobody has an issue with, but evolutionists go further and claim the entire evolutionary "family tree" as ''fact''. That is incorrect, and would be what Ed Poor's edit was referring to. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 21:40, 4 November 2008 (EST)