DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Major ancestry breakthrough (4.4 million year old hominid found)

Quote:

---

Football teams evolve.

---

Quote:

---

I'm not saying science has it right. In fact, I think they're probably in deep left field in regards to the truth.

---

Interesting. In what way? Just want to know your thoughts on it

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I'm not saying science has it right. In fact, I think they're probably in deep left field in regards to the truth.

---

Interesting. In what way? Just want to know your thoughts on it

---

Quote:

---

One thing I'd like to point out to all the science-deniers.

---

Quote:

---

How much evidence will it take to convince you that science makes no prediction about something it can't test, like religion, and therefore isn't a threat to it. Not only that, how much evidence do you need to prove something? Because evolution has the equivalent of mountains on its side.

---

Quote:

---

One thing I'd like to point out to all the science-deniers.

Quote:

---

Not sure that this comment is relevant on this thread. At least not until Knight of Brown posts. i believe he is a strict creationist.

---

---

Have you seen RememberMuni's posts regarding anything scientific? And who know's, maybe KoB has been reading and not posting.

Quote:

---

Science doesn't make predictions and it doesn't interpret the info. That is where I have a problem. We hear from supposed experts that things are a certain way and you are an idiot for thinking different. I think scientists try to get the facts to fit their beliefs.

---

So were back to the fallibility of man then? I'm not going to say that a select few don't push their agenda and fix their results and give the majority of scientists a bad name because of it. However, the vast majority do not. We have our observations, we base a hypothesis of why it could be happening on previous research, and then we test it. The data comes out and is put through statistical analyses that is only a positive test if the stats say there is a 95% confidence interval. Sometimes, certain things are open for interpretation due to taking place in a model organism, like a mouse. We interpret it to the best of our knowledge based on previous research. The scientific method is great because it limits the amount of human tinkering that can take place, basically, it removes human bias and error.

There are aspects of science though where the proof for it is overwhelming. Take the Theory of Evolution for example. You can do a primary journal article search on any major research search engine and come up with over twenty thousand hits easily. All of these help understand some aspect of evolution. The hypothesis that animals change over time and create new species has been shown to be true through many different avenues of research from genomics to paleontology. This isn't something new with very little relative testing, but the largest study comprising the most populace group of researchers in any scientific topic. At some point, one has to look at the mountain in front of them and acknowledge its existence.

Quote:

---

I just mean it in the sense that what we thought we knew 100 years ago was way off base, and what we thought we knew 50 years later was way off base, and what we know now will be viewed as being way off base 50 years down the road. Maybe 'way off base' isn't the right term, but I think you get the gist.

---

Quote:

---

It was given by Elaine Morgan. She believes we took to the water long ago and thus loss are hair and became bipedal. She explains why she feels so strongly about this and gives some compelling reasons why in this talk. Not sure if you've followed her or even seen this conference yet... But how do you feel about that theory?

---

I've heard of the hypothesis, and at the time it seemed like a plausible explanation, however, I think that this fossil evidence in this thread shows that her hypothesis may be officially shot down The ape walked in the trees, covered in hair, and could walk upright when it wanted to. No water involved and they're walking upright. Oh well, it was interesting at least.

Quote:

---

Also do you feel epigenetics has any role in our evolution? Epigenetics is really exciting stuff to me... it's seems to be the missing link in our makeup. Behaviours, disease, etc... seem like they can be passed down from events that happened to generations before. I would think this has to play some role in our evolution?

---

Quote:

---

speaking of timelones. I've always wondered if the Grand Canyon really took millions of years to form.

Here's an article about a little canyon being formed in minutes. If it did this in minutes could the canyon have been formed in much less time? Perhaps, forty days and forty nights?

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/artic...-farm-land.html

---