Oh really? Then tell me a few other things people "Practice" every day. I can think of a number of things humans practice every day.... one is religion.
Yes, really. Growing things to produce a change in genetics within those things is forcing evolution. I do it frequently with my roses by cross pollinating different types. Why would I bring up off-topic instances of what people practise.
Just because someone practices or believes in something, doesn't make it fact. except maybe in the eyes of the individual.
Oh really? Because people practise sex with each other and mix breeds is not an example of evolution? :roll: Here, read this:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=evolution-in-the-everday-world
Because a process is repeatable, doesn't make it absolute either.
So? Evolution happens. It is a fact and it does repeat.
Evolution is a Fact and a Theory
If you go to the bottom of
this site it has a list of references you can read as to evolution being fact.
Here are more:
http://atheism.about.com/od/evolutionexplained/a/fact_theory.htm
http://www.vertpaleo.org/education/paleoprofiles.cfm
At present, science can only show us a part of the overall picture, we can only predict a certain distance ahead in the future, but the bigger the equation, the bigger we try and expand out perspective, the more factors one has to calculate, most of the time, many of the factors aren't even known, thus can not be calculated.... and even if one tries, it now just falls under Educated Guess, Probabilities, Limited Statistics, and nothing absolute.
Irrelevant. We do not have to understand exactly 100% of something to determine whether it is a fact or not.
If you rely yourself to be unquestionably attached to the theories of the scientific process, just as religious people unquestionably attach themselves to their God(s) and commandments, then there is no difference between the two in many aspects, and this seems to be where you fail to understand my position...... most likely because you're offended that someone would tie your thought process with science, to the thought processes of religion.
Irrelevant.
Telling me I'm wrong without any counter argument or reasons why and expressing such a level of bias to not even entertain the possibility, is proof enough that I'm right.
rofflmfao I've provided plenty of stuff showing that theories can also be factual. Get a grip. Your "proof" is only in your head and is a delusion.
Thanks for not specifying any one particular part of that poorly designed web site,
You want me to read it for you, too? Are you helpless?
but looking through and reading it, it doesn't explain much more then what I already knew. Many of the processes described, in particular "Trial and Error" (the car stopping example) isn't originally a scientific process of thinking.... that's just common sense, something we've all done to solve problems since probably the dawn of humanity and long before Science ever became a reality.
Yes, science uses reason rather than superstition to discover the whys and wherefores of our universe. If you don't like that, then come up with a better method for explaining our universe. :roll:
All Science is, is a leech religion, where it finds something that most believe to be true, runs it through a few tests, and if it fits their quota of testing, they claim it's scientifically proven/true/fact and stamp it as Kosher..... yet all these people already knew through using general common sense and their own ability to understand, that this was the case.
That's your opinion. Big deal. Call it whatever you like, science does a much better job of explaining our universe and its activities than anything else.
Science has been wrong on a number of occasions in our history, and most times, Science was wrong and we as a society paid the price.
So? Science also has the ability to amend its comments as new evidence is discovered. It can grow. Did you understand how to tie shoelaces properly right away? Did you understand how to drive a car right away? Or did you discover how to tie or drive bettter by practising it?
Many times in our past, have we been told something was better or far safer to use, only to find out after 20-30 years of doing something a certain way, or using a product for so long, that the mass population that was used as guinea pigs for so long, now have various illnesses or complications..... and then and only then, does science admit its mistakes.... but only by saying that they either didn't know something at the time, or didn't factor something in that they should have.
Life's a bitch, get used to it.
Either way, their scientific process didn't give them the whole picture, everybody relied on them to be telling people the truth and doing things safely, and ended up using all of us as lab subjects for a mass study of the effects of their theories, on us.
That's not science doing that, it is people using technology doing that. Science discovered how to split atoms but it didn't drop the bombs on two cities in Japan. Science is just a tool for discovery, technology is a tool for using discoveries, and it's up to people what to do with both.
Lead, Asbestos, Hydrogenated Oils, PVC Plastics, Insecticides/DDT, that Delousing powder crap people had tossed onto them, including children..... the list just keeps going.
The point being is that Science and those who follow science told everybody these things can benefit our society in some fashion or another, never explained any of the dangers or side effects.... probably didn't even know they existed (or just didn't care) and tested it on a mass scale of humanity to see what the results are.
In my opinion that's almost as bad, if not, worse then what many religions have done in the past to various societies.
*shrugs* Then come up with a better method of investigation.
You know, with all the wrongs everybody sees churches doing and all the lawsuits and compensation demanded from religious organizations, you'd think people would start to sue and hang scientists by the toes for the damage they have done to people's lives through their arrogance & ignorance.... but very few do.
So? People go after the people who abuse the science and they do that frequently. Why hammer on someone because they explore and investigate? Why not hammer on someone for abusing what was discovered?
Why?
Because it's never the science community's fault for all of these things they threw on us to try/use before ensuring they're indeed safe..... They didn't know.
Funny thing is that I thought it was their job to know these things.... I thought these people in our society to study and learn all the pros and cons about something.... to inform us.... to seek out the truth, yet we have so many scientists either too concerned about making a name for themselves, or to pander to special interest groups with loads of money.... they don't even know how to look at anything objectively anymore, let alone think out side of the box to look at the bigger picture of what they're doing, and in my opinion, that's just as corrupt and just as bad as the corrupt priests in a church who take for granted the trust people put on to them in their positions.
So you don't like science, quit using things science and tech have discovered and developed. *shrugs*
