2012? What do you think? Is it true?

2012 claim?

  • True.

    Votes: 10 9.2%

  • False.

    Votes: 99 90.8%
  • Total voters
    109
Being a science person my self, you made a very large error that really bugs me...

Btw, it's called Evolution Theory, so it's already been proven...
Click to expand...

You obviously know NOTHING about science if you're going to go around saying things like that. A theory is NOT proven. Only a Scientific Law is considered for all intents and purposes proven, and even then it can be wrong (yes, unlikely, but it could be).

A theory is our current best understanding of any given phenomenon. While it is our best understanding, this does NOT EVER mean it's proven.

For the record, I'm not arguing for either "side" here. I'm simply trying to keep thing fairly accurate as long as we are talking about science.
 
DarthPika said:
Being a science person my self, you made a very large error that really bugs me...


You obviously know NOTHING about science if you're going to go around saying things like that. A theory is NOT proven. Only a Scientific Law is considered for all intents and purposes proven, and even then it can be wrong (yes, unlikely, but it could be).

A theory is our current best understanding of any given phenomenon. While it is our best understanding, this does NOT EVER mean it's proven.

For the record, I'm not arguing for either "side" here. I'm simply trying to keep thing fairly accurate as long as we are talking about science.
Click to expand...
Ah yes... you made the same mistake I used to make.

I was wondering how long it would take till someone would reply on that quote... Do you know the definition of ''theory'', I don't think so, well here it is: ''A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.''

A theory includes facts, facts are needed to make a theory. That's why creation isn't a theory.

Now you may say: ''...or is widely accepted...''. So it's not always tested? Right, but some things can't be tested (yet). Like the beginning of the universe... just for an example.

Science uses a lot of word with other meanings than normally, this may get you confused. Well I've found a vid, give a look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVAYDWJrJ7c No, this isn't just somebody talking about things she doesn't know...
 
I am saying this Y2K did not happen Year 2012 will or will not happen depending on the years before 2012. If the Antichrist does or does not come or what ever does or does not come we will know if it is right or wrong.

"The Mayan Calendar is not predicting the end of the world 2012, but the start of a new era."
from http://www.experiencefestival.com/mayan_calendar
 
Pokequaza said:
Ah yes... you made the same mistake I used to make.

I was wondering how long it would take till someone would reply on that quote... Do you know the definition of ''theory'', I don't think so, well here it is: ''A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.''

A theory includes facts, facts are needed to make a theory. That's why creation isn't a theory.

Now you may say: ''...or is widely accepted...''. So it's not always tested? Right, but some things can't be tested (yet). Like the beginning of the universe... just for an example.

Science uses a lot of word with other meanings than normally, this may get you confused. Well I've found a vid, give a look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVAYDWJrJ7c No, this isn't just somebody talking about things she doesn't know...
Click to expand...

Kid, I'd be willing to bet I've taken far more science classes than you have. I know what I'm talking about. Every single teacher DRILLS it into everyone's heads that a theory is NOT a proven fact. It may be based on evidence that seems (I say seems, because it may in reality be misinterpreted) to support it, but it can not an absolute truth. Evolution has many flaws. I'm not saying that this means creationism is right either. I'm JUST saying that there are other possibilities out there. Yes, evolution looks like the best answer going by current data, but this is Science! One discovery could just as easily further prove evolution, or it could debunk the theory all together.

And I said I wasn't taking any sides. I know very well why creation isn't a theory. I was simply pointing out your error.

Please don't abuse the word.
 
DarthPika said:
Kid ._.?, I'd be willing to bet I've taken far more science classes than you have. I only have had 3 years of science (last year was serious, previous 2 were more ''basic'' stuff), so I might be wrong, I admit that, but my knowledge of science is way more bigger than most people of my age, still I can be wrong ofcourse, and when I am I'll admit I was wrong. But this time...? I know what I'm talking about. Every single teacher DRILLS it into everyone's heads that a theory is NOT a proven fact. I don't know how your teachers are, but they can make mistakes too, I have to correct my teachers even often. And like I said, the meaning of theory isn't known by almost anybody. It may be based on evidence that seems (I say seems, because it may in reality be misinterpreted) to support it, but it can not an absolute truth. Evolution has many flaws. I'm not saying that this means creationism is right either. I'm JUST saying that there are other possibilities out there. Yes, evolution looks like the best answer going by current data, but this is Science! One discovery could just as easily further prove evolution, or it could debunk the theory all together. Anyway, did you watch the vid? A theory is based on facts, laws and hypotheses, there is a lot of truth in. And not ''there may...''. Maybe it's not 100% proven (although I still think it is the truth), but you've made some mistakes too by saying that.

And I said I wasn't taking any sides. I know very well why creation isn't a theory. I was simply pointing out your error.

Please don't abuse the word. But tell me then? Where can we say it's proven? Is there any proven theory then?
Click to expand...
 
I agree, Pokequaza. Besides, basic science classes will not give you any information like this. This is something that you just kind of hear about on your own, not taught in schools.
 
Eevee, "why are you cutting yourself off from the spiritual part of your being?"
You can't prove the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist!
Or Zeus!
Or Thor!
Or Horus!
Or Shiva!
Or Wodan!
Or Allah!

The evidence is right there before you, look at the world Shiva created for you. Look at how the FSM is holding you down on earth using his noodley appendages. Look at the lightning, evidence of Thor's mighty hammer. Look at the great pyramids, only a god as powerful as Horus could've helped build those. Look at the stars illuminating the sky, is this not evidence of Allah's unlimited power? And what are the clouds, if not the house of Wodan, looking down upon us?

If we open our minds to the supernatural, we close our minds to reality. Lack of negative evidence is not the same as positive evidence. But if you insist my leprechaun, invisible pink unicorn, magical phoenix, huge dragon living the the centre of the Earth and my alien friends would like to have a word with you.

I just came home, so I won't be addressing every point made by DarthPika and Eevee now, but feel free to discuss anything. I see Pokequaza is taking good care of everything, but I still think its rather cowardice to start this discussion again while I'm away...
 
afstandopleren said:
There is more going on in reality then science can fathom atm. I do hope you know that.
Click to expand...
True, but gods? It's proven everything can do without a god (well I mean from the beginning of the universe, our solarsystem and life here on Earth), so there's no need for one. Still we can't prove it doesn't exist, neither we can prove it does exist. And since most things can be explained without a god (unexplainable things will follow eventually) I don't see the need for the role of a god.

But let's put it in an other way. Yesterday I met the Tooth Fairy and she said to me, god doesn't exist. She told me she manipulated the brains of the authors of the bible, to write a book about a not existing figure called ''god''. And now she laughing at all the people who do still believe in ''god'' and believe what the bible says... < How about that?

So we can make up many stories... You must see the difference between reality and fiction. However for most people the reality seems more fiction to them than a god. Things like the string theory, other dimensions etc. are just too complicated: Hey! Why don't we just say a fictional figure did/caused/created it? Sounds good and it's eay, so why not?...
 
afstandopleren said:
There is more going on in reality then science can fathom atm. I do hope you know that.
Click to expand...
And that's the beauty of science. Science will probably never know everything, but it's the only thing we have which goes beyond superstition and actually tries to find actual truth. We may never reach it, but at least we're finally on the right way.
 
Here is what I belive please don't shoot me or anything but, I think that when the end times come Is when we aren't looking.When this will happen only God knows.I personolly don't think we should dwell on it I think we should be in the here and now not in the what was and what might be,
 
Pokequaza said:
True, but gods? It's proven everything can do without a god (well I mean from the beginning of the universe, our solarsystem and life here on Earth), so there's no need for one. Still we can't prove it doesn't exist, neither we can prove it does exist. And since most things can be explained without a god (unexplainable things will follow eventually) I don't see the need for the role of a god.

But let's put it in an other way. Yesterday I met the Tooth Fairy and she said to me, god doesn't exist. She told me she manipulated the brains of the authors of the bible, to write a book about a not existing figure called ''god''. And now she laughing at all the people who do still believe in ''god'' and believe what the bible says... < How about that?

So we can make up many stories... You must see the difference between reality and fiction. However for most people the reality seems more fiction to them than a god. Things like the string theory, other dimensions etc. are just too complicated: Hey! Why don't we just say a fictional figure did/caused/created it? Sounds good and it's eay, so why not?...
Click to expand...


I'm not saying that God created everything here, but PLEASE stop saying that we "proved" it.

WE HAVE NOT PROVED IT! Is it THAT hard for you to understand that it can not be proven? Yes, the have good ideas about how it happened, but only an idiot goes around singing about how "we proved how it happened, we proved how it all happened!!!". >_>

Now that that has been taken care of...

You may continue now.
 
DarthPika said:
I'm not saying that God created everything here, but PLEASE stop saying that we "proved" it.

WE HAVE NOT PROVED IT! Is it THAT hard for you to understand that it can not be proven? Yes, the have good ideas about how it happened, but only an idiot goes around singing about how "we proved how it happened, we proved how it all happened!!!". >_>

Now that that has been taken care of...

You may continue now.
Click to expand...
Prove in scientific ways means we can explain how it happened if you didn't know. Are tests really necessary? If theoretical everything(!) fits and it's impossible to test it I think we can say it's proven then. in this example, yes we can tell how our Solarsystem was born, what happened and how. We know how it happened, so I would consider that as proven, right? Otherwise we should never be able to use the word proven. But you're right; science can't explain everything, but we can get close to the truth.
 
DarthPika said:
WE HAVE NOT PROVED IT! Is it THAT hard for you to understand that it can not be proven? Yes, the have good ideas about how it happened, but only an idiot goes around singing about how "we proved how it happened, we proved how it all happened!!!". >_>
Click to expand...
I find myself agreeing with DarthPika here.

Proof is a mathematical term. In science, things can only be proven beyond reasonable doubt, and even then, new evidence may cast doubt upon what was previously established. Whilst most of the time new evidence only further sharpens and enriches a theory, ever so often it is proven false.

But this imperfection of science is what makes it perfect. There are no dogmas, no absolute truths and no punishment for questioning it (unless being proven wrong is a punishment to you. Being corrected, to me, seems more like a blessing, though). Religion, on the other hand, relies on dogma and threats, yet gives us nothing to validate this.
The scientific method, is in my opinion, by far one of the greatest things the human intellect came up with in history, as it gives us a concrete, viable and functional way of understanding the universe. As long as religion does not want to subject itself to peer review, and spread dogmas as if they were truths, it cannot be taken seriously.

But on the other hand, evolution has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt, it is as much of a scientific fact as one can possibly hope for. The Big Bang theory is nearing this point (and unless you're a pretty good astronomer, doubting it is most likely solely because of ignorance), abiogenesis seems to be on top of things, and the formation and death of stars are pretty factual as well, and with this the formation of elements (other than hydrogen). So yes, we have proven beyond reasonable doubt how the universe, life, and pretty much everything formed. If you want to be ignorant of it, so be it, but you're missing out of a universe of beauty, or a scale unimaginable by man, because of some self-centred, small-minded idea proposed by people over 2000 years ago...

And just to clarify, a theory explains the facts, in a sense, it is far superior, and the highest you can get in science. Whilst the neo-Darwinian theory of natural selection might still be incomplete, the changes in allele frequencies over time, or the gradual change of organisms over time, is a FACT.
 
Yes, it's true. We're all gonna die because the Mayan's ran out of paper for their stupid calender, and Meteorites, Floods, Lightning, Fire, etc. Will occur, and we will all die. Merry Christmas everybody.

NOOOOOOOOT!
 
@ Heavenly Spoon,

Uhm... facts aren't the most important things in science, more one of the less important things, the theories are one of the most imporatant, watch my vid I posted on the previous page (well all trusting that vid, and I can very well agree with it)...
 
Pokequaza said:
Uhm... facts aren't the most important things in science, more one of the less important things, the theories are one of the most imporatant, watch my vid I posted on the previous page (well all trusting that vid, and I can very well agree with it)...
Click to expand...
Heavenly Spoon :F said:
And just to clarify, a theory explains the facts, in a sense, it is far superior
Click to expand...
What?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top