Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Hmmm

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Mario Dovalina on July 4, 2002 16:32:17 UTC

I don't agree with your assertation that evolution is 100% true and essentially unrefutable. If we were to dig up evidence of human bones in precambrian rock, that would be a deathblow to evolution. If we were to discover an actual genetic barrier that the fundies keep alluding to, that would be quite damaging to evolutionary theory.

Essentially what you're saying is that the 'theory' that the sun doesn't revolve around the earth is meaningless because it can't be disproven. How can an 'absolutely true' theory be meaningless?

***I have no clue which side of the coin turned up but I can guarantee you it was either heads or tails.***

What you're making is the argument from ignorance. If a given theory doesn't yet explain a detail, it must be meaningless? Maybe you deserve a stout smack in the mouth. :)

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2022 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins