[kahljorn]

" the proof behind evolution."

"There is no proof in this, that's where this argument comes from. He thinks the schools teach that it's the ab solute truth..."

" Like I said, I didn't say that proved anything. If it proved anything, it wouldn't be called a theory. "

"I realize it doesn't "Prove" anything because if it did it wouldn't be a theory anymore."

See, now here's the hilarious thing. EVOLUTION IS A THEORY. You couldn't understand that. I didn't ignore that point you made, I addressed it like 5 times and you glossed over it to pick on the fringes, as you say .
My entire point was about addressing the fact that it's not a FACT but a theory and we can't necessarily present the information as per your request because it's a THEORY and we're trying to RESEARCH it to discover if it is or isn't true. THATS HOW THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD WORKS. If we didn't investigate theories the whole of scientific knowledge would be NOTHING. Does that point make sense? Because I think it makes perfect sense.

Address that, since I addressed yours. You can say I bushed around the issue with that statement, but I answered it completely honestly without any sort of agenda or blind belief behind it, JUST THE FACTS. If I said I cou ld prove it I'd be lying.
Add in the fact that it was about what they teach in science class rooms and a very large portion of science is the pursual of theories in trying to prove or disprove them, and you have why I was on topic debating a point and you were being a pointless asshole with an agenda against evolution, or me, or whatever it was you were doing.
I admit I used the word proof in one of my statements, mostly because you guys were throwing around the word proof like nothing. I should've used the word evidence. Evidence is a great word for science. We have evidence of evolution. Thus we investigate, like some kind of scientific detectives who are searching for the truth in the only true way to search for truth.

I practically said the same exact thing ziggy just said in my post like three or four times. Your issue is obviously with either comprehension or some kind of personal problem. I'm not sure which, but I'll try to be more clear. Am I not always necessarily clear guys?

If you want I can explain to you the reasoning behind the above. I don't mind explaining why the scientific system was built this way, but I can tell that it was so we can obtain a more complete truth.


"Show me the evidence, or admit to a reliance on faith and that evolution from a common species is just another religious belief."

I thought I should respond to this for good measure. A) How many people are questioning their religion's validity by attempting to find evidence and whatever else scientists do B) Do they actively seek out material evidence of god's existence C) How many religous people call their religion a theory, how many would claim it was "True" D) How exactly would you prove god's existence, is it even possible?
Those are just some general questions that I feel are applicable, especially to the evolution threads actual topic.