Natural selection is evolution?

[Dancing David]

Don't worry - the supply of idiots is near unending.

It is amazing how they keep on quantum leaping into this lower idiocy area.

 

[Paulhoff]

Of course, one can say that about anything.

No one can not, daaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, like the idea of flying pigs theory for one, you can test away on that one and it is still not a theory. The string theory is more like a hypothesis for now, but that still means that it is base on other theories and is an educated idea, not something someone just throws together base on uneducated ideas.

To get to a hypothesis you have to do a lot of work, and a website does not count.

Paul

 

[articulett]

Ya know, I read the very first post, cracked my knuckles, said "Oh Boy!", and merrily began the complete and total destruction... just to read on find you guys have done it for me!

You can still join in-- they're impervious... and in their head they're earning heaven bonus points for doing battle for their "intelligent designer" (who appears to have sent them here for our amusement...)

Seeing them in full color display makes you feel gratitude for not having what afflicts them.

 

[Hellbound]

No one can not, daaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, like the idea of flying pigs theory for one, you can test away on that one and it is still not a theory. The string theory is more like a hypothesis for now, but that still means that it is base on other theories and is an educated idea, not something someone just throws together base on uneducated ideas.

To get to a hypothesis you have to do a lot of work, and a website does not count.

Paul

Well, it is a theory, but not all theories are created equally. And it has been tested...just not enough.

String theory explains the currently observed phenomena in the area it covers. The problem, of course, is that so do the standard model and quantum mechanics. What we lack to elevate string theory to the level of, say, the theory of relativity or evolution, is evidence that shows it as a better explanation than the current models and theories.

A theory, in science, is simply an explanation of why an event/phenomena/process occurrs a certain way. It starts as a hypothesis, and if testing does not contradict that hypothesis it becomes a theory. A law, on the other hand, is simply a description of what happens in nature, with no explanation of why. Theories vary in reliability, and some are outright false (Lamarckian evolution, for example, is still a theory, although one contradicted by evidence and discarded today).

Tai, you continue to show a lack of understanding of basic science principals in almost every post. I'd suggest you spend some time learning. Actually, I take that back. These differences and details have been explained to you time and time again, yet you still bring up the same invalid arguments and cling to your straw men. I can reach only one of two conclusions: You are woefully incapable of learning at all, or you are intentionally dishonest.