• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is evolution a fact?

A very good scientific book on that issue is by Professor William Schopf from UCLA called the Cradle of Life. It is worth studying.

But you mean you studied each and every one of what you mention above in detail?

It is independent of what any of us have studied or not.
 
It is independent of what any of us have studied or not.
Here is the point to be made.

When using the appeal to authority, no matter the authority, you still did not persuade since you rely on such appeal for your own appeal to authority.
 
A very good scientific book on that issue is by Professor William Schopf from UCLA called the Cradle of Life. It is worth studying.
I'm sure it was very good in 1987, but I bet the field has advanced since then. I would look for more recent work, maybe that has passed peer review, if I want to learn more about the topic.
 
I'm sure it was very good in 1987, but I bet the field has advanced since then. I would look for more recent work, maybe that has passed peer review, if I want to learn more about the topic.
This is a lot of original work such as reading say Einstein or Darwin as more examples. This author is a trailblazer. I paid much more for the book new when it came out than you can get it for today. It is well worth studying.
 
Here is the point to be made.

When using the appeal to authority, no matter the authority, you still did not persuade since you rely on such appeal for your own appeal to authority.

I am not appealing to authority, I am stating scientific facts.
 
This is a lot of original work such as reading say Einstein or Darwin as more examples. This author is a trailblazer. I paid much more for the book new when it came out than you can get it for today. It is well worth studying.
Einstein and Darwin proved themselves through peer review, not just writing a book.
 
There is a growing tendency to refer to the theory of evolution as not a theory at all, but a fact.
I'm pretty sure the Vatican even subscribes to "evolution"...

The "theory" status for human evolution is likely due to the "missing link"?!
 
No


No, this is not an appeal to authority. If I claim that a rock I drop will fall to the earth, is that an appeal to authority?

You dropped the rock. See the difference?

In the case of this argument you are appealing to others. They are what you accept as your authority? Get it yet?
 
You dropped the rock. See the difference?

In the case of this argument you are appealing to others. They are what you accept as your authority? Get it yet?

No, I just let it go. That is not why it dropped.
 
I'm pretty sure the Vatican even subscribes to "evolution"...

The "theory" status for human evolution is likely due to the "missing link"?!
Evolutionists deny the Vatican too.

This is what I believe it all boils down to.

Conjecture

Due to ancient fossils losing all traces of DNA, we have essentially rocks to look at.
 
You dropped the rock. See the difference?

In the case of this argument you are appealing to others. They are what you accept as your authority? Get it yet?

You don't understand basic science. Who drops the rock is irrelevant. The rock has been dropped. Scientific prediction is that it will fall.
 
No


No, this is not an appeal to authority. If I claim that a rock I drop will fall to the earth, is that an appeal to authority?

Clarify, in your example, you tell me you drop the rock? Again so you do not revert to denial.
 
Evolutionists deny the Vatican too.

This is what I believe it all boils down to.

Conjecture

Due to ancient fossils losing all traces of DNA, we have essentially rocks to look at.
There are no such things as evolutionists.

Evolutionary theory is backed by observation, facts, and the testing of them. Fossils are are not the same as rocks.
 
You don't understand basic science. Who drops the rock is irrelevant. The rock has been dropped. Scientific prediction is that it will fall.

Let's take the perfect stranger who has no clue of Physics and lives a sheltered life and you tell him this dropped rock concept.

Who is he accepting? Is he accepting an appeal to authority?

In my case I have studied physics and still understand it well. I know rocks fall. I do not need you to tell me they fall. You are not my authority so when you tell me things, I choose to believe you or not.

In the case of Gould, and I have some of his books too, we who accept him do it based on appeal to authority.

Supposedly we only read his books due to suspecting he is the authority.

I cite Professor Schopf many times and that is me appealing to authority.

Schopf has done the research and includes it in his book. I could call him a liar. But he documents things so very well.

Here on the forum, seldom will an poster engage in quality documentation. They appeal to authority.
 
There are no such things as evolutionists.

Evolutionary theory is backed by observation, facts, and the testing of them. Fossils are are not the same as rocks.

I can't pin you down that you made those observations, created those facts or even tested them. And you saying fossils are not rocks does not make a bit of sense., Minerals from Earth replace bones. If you do not know that, I shan't bother you.,
 
Drop is just a figure of speech. I do not make it fall to the earth. What does?
Would I be accurate in saying if I believe only you, I appealed to authority since you pose as the authority?

If you are no authority, why accept what you claim?
 
Let's take the perfect stranger who has no clue of Physics and lives a sheltered life and you tell him this dropped rock concept.

Who is he accepting? Is he accepting an appeal to authority?

In my case I have studied physics and still understand it well. I know rocks fall. I do not need you to tell me they fall. You are not my authority so when you tell me things, I choose to believe you or not.

In the case of Gould, and I have some of his books too, we who accept him do it based on appeal to authority.

Supposedly we only read his books due to suspecting he is the authority.

I cite Professor Schopf many times and that is me appealing to authority.

Schopf has done the research and includes it in his book. I could call him a liar. But he documents things so very well.

Here on the forum, seldom will an poster engage in quality documentation. They appeal to authority.

Citing any individual is appealing to authority. Science is not a person. Something that is a scientific fact is not such because a scientist says so. Nothing is true because an individual says so.
 
You don't understand basic science. Who drops the rock is irrelevant. The rock has been dropped. Scientific prediction is that it will fall.

That is not a reason to declare i do not understand basic science. Why did you make that claim? Who told you I do not understand basic science? I put in a lot of time understanding science. How dare you tell the forum I did not learn science.

Who are you naming as this scientific person?

When I studied Physics we always learned the source of all such claims.
 
I can't pin you down that you made those observations, created those facts or even tested them. And you saying fossils are not rocks does not make a bit of sense., Minerals from Earth replace bones. If you do not know that, I shan't bother you.,
The are not my observations. They are scientific observations.
 
Back
Top Bottom