Evolution

[David S]

In general I believe in evolution although I think there are issues that evolution alone does not explain. We should also note that it is called the theory of evolution. Although there is evidence in its favor, as far as I know it is not proven.

[David S]

We should also note that it is called the theory of evolution.

I like being skeptical as much as the next guy, but that's not a relevant or valid point at all.  Do you question the theory of gravity?  Theory has a different meaning in a scientific sense than in an everyday common use sense.

Gravity is not theory. It is fact. Mathematically it is expressed as the Gxm1xm2/r^2. We can test it and show that it is true. Our understanding of it is sufficiently accurate to allow us to navigate a spacecraft to mars. But no one has been able to create DNA from the primordial ooze. And while breeders can create new types of dogs through selective breeding, at the end of the day they still have a dog, not a cat or some other animal. It has not been proven that all of the steps necessary to get from ooze to man can actually happen, so evolution remains a theory.

[David S]

Gravity is not theory. It is fact. Mathematically it is expressed as the Gxm1xm2/r^2. We can test it and show that it is true. But no one has been able to create DNA from the primordial ooze. And while breeders can create new types of dogs through selective breeding, at the end of the day they still have a dog, not a cat or some other animal. It has not been proven that the steps necessary to get from ooze to man can actually happen, so evolution remains a theory.

In short, to state that gravity is simply "a fact" is, well, false. 

In the Gabu universe do objects fall up? Do they accelerate at some acceleration which deviates measureably from the formula I posted? Did scientists in your universe not manage interplanetary travel because they could not accurately predict gravity?  If you want to look at the universe on the scale of galaxies you need Einstein's relativity, and if you want to look at subatomic particles you need quantum theory, but in the world in which you and I live the laws of motion developed by Newton 3 centuries years ago are very  accurate and form the basis of virtually all engineering calculations today.

As to evolution, have you ever seen a new species evolve from another?

[David S]

John
If I throw a ball up in the air its velocity and position at any time are quite predictable. If I throw the ball at an angle it will follow a parabolic path and its path is also quite predictable as long as you throw in a few corrections for air resistance. Artillery shells are aimed quite accurately this way. We know these things to be true because we have done countless experiments which show that they are. We have observed the results.

But as far as I know, no one has seen a new species evolve from another one. And scientists have not been able to create DNA from the primordial ooze.  While evolution theory may seem quite plausible there are no actual observations of evolution in action.

Lets say you have to place a bet on one of the following hypotheses:

1) You throw a ball up it will come back down.

2) Start with muck, and wait long enough and you get mammals.

Which would you bet on? (Assumming your lifespan was long enough to test the second hypothesis)

[David S]

When I look up gravity in my handy dandy American Heritage dictionary it tells me that gravity is a force whose magnitude is given by the formula I quoted earlier. The word "theory" is not mentioned. When I look up evolution it refers to it as a theory.

[David S]

Gabu and John
After giving it more thought I think I understand your point. When I speak of gravity I'm speaking of the force which is currently holding my butt in this chair. When you speak of gravity you are speaking of the underlying mechanism which causes gravity to operate. The behavior of gravity, the force, is well understood but the mechanism behind it may not be.