Jump to content


Photo

Proof Of Evolution Using The Scientific Method


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Dave

Dave

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 627 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 65
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Arizona

Posted 31 January 2016 - 09:17 AM

This topic is in response to a poster at the topic, "Circular reasoning: Evolution is a fact," saying he "doesn't need to" when challenged to prove the theory of evolution using the scientific method.

 

I can understand his reluctance in light of the fact that the challenge did stray a bit from the topic of the thread. Now, I am openly challenging him, or anybody else, to answer a direct question in its own topic.

 

First, some parameters:

 

1. By evolution I mean the "macro" kind. No waffling or equivocation on this.

 

2. By new species I mean molecules-to-man. Entirely new species arising from an alleged ancestral species. Birds from dinosaurs, etc.

 

3. By scientific method I mean the commonly accepted process. Can we agree on the process as thus?

 

 

  1. Make an observation or observations.
  2. Ask questions about the observations and gather information.
  3. Form a hypothesis — a tentative description of what’s been observed, and make predictions based on that hypothesis.
  4. Test the hypothesis and predictions in an experiment that can be reproduced.
  5. Analyze the data and draw conclusions; accept or reject the hypothesis or modify the hypothesis if necessary.
  6. Reproduce the experiment until there are no discrepancies between observations and theory.

 

And agree on the following?

 

 

  • The hypothesis must be testable and falsifiable, according to North Carolina State University. Falsifiable means that there must be a possible negative answer to the hypothesis.
  • Research must involve deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is the process of using true premises to reach a logical true conclusion while inductive reasoning takes the opposite approach.
  • An experiment should include a dependent variable (which does not change) and an independent variable (which does change).
  • An experiment should include an experimental group and a control group. The control group is what the experimental group is compared against.

 

4. As we review the answers we will be watching for strict adherence to the steps as outlined in the scientific method. Be aware that terms such as, "we infer," "we think," "we assume," "perhaps," "maybe," "might," "best guess," etc., are red flags that might lead to an accusation of equivocation that invalidates your answer.

 

5. The challenge is purely a valid scientific question. There has been no mention of God, creation, or any other kind of alternative to the theory of evolution. Any attempt to deflect the question by addressing any such things will be noted as a failure to answer the question.

 

6. Did the challenge mention gravity or any other scientific theory? No. So please don't go down that rabbit trail. The question is about the theory of evolution and the process of proving it using the scientific method.

 

7. Finally, there are only two possible responses to this challenge: Show the theory of evolution being arrived at via the scientific process, or admit it can't be done.

 

Now for the challenge:

 

Show, step by step in detail, the process by which the theory of evolution, which introduces entirely new species, can be arrived at by using the scientific method.

 

If everybody keeps it clean and professional this should be interesting and educational for all.

 

Have fun!


  • Bmaxdlux likes this

#2 Bmaxdlux

Bmaxdlux

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 56
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Southern Oregon

Posted 31 January 2016 - 11:48 AM

This topic is in response to a poster at the topic, "Circular reasoning: Evolution is a fact," saying he "doesn't need to" when challenged to prove the theory of evolution using the scientific method.
 
I can understand his reluctance in light of the fact that the challenge did stray a bit from the topic of the thread. Now, I am openly challenging him, or anybody else, to answer a direct question in its own topic.
 
First, some parameters:
 
1. By evolution I mean the "macro" kind. No waffling or equivocation on this.
 
2. By new species I mean molecules-to-man. Entirely new species arising from an alleged ancestral species. Birds from dinosaurs, etc.
 
3. By scientific method I mean the commonly accepted process. Can we agree on the process as thus?
 

 
And agree on the following?
 

 
4. As we review the answers we will be watching for strict adherence to the steps as outlined in the scientific method. Be aware that terms such as, "we infer," "we think," "we assume," "perhaps," "maybe," "might," "best guess," etc., are red flags that might lead to an accusation of equivocation that invalidates your answer.
 
5. The challenge is purely a valid scientific question. There has been no mention of God, creation, or any other kind of alternative to the theory of evolution. Any attempt to deflect the question by addressing any such things will be noted as a failure to answer the question.
 
6. Did the challenge mention gravity or any other scientific theory? No. So please don't go down that rabbit trail. The question is about the theory of evolution and the process of proving it using the scientific method.
 
7. Finally, there are only two possible responses to this challenge: Show the theory of evolution being arrived at via the scientific process, or admit it can't be done.
 
Now for the challenge:
 
Show, step by step in detail, the process by which the theory of evolution, which introduces entirely new species, can be arrived at by using the scientific method.
 
If everybody keeps it clean and professional this should be interesting and educational for all.
 
Have fun!



Excellent challenge.

However, please forgive me if all I do is stand
by and listen to the crickets chirp.


Max ;)
  • mike the wiz likes this

#3 Dave

Dave

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 627 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 65
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Arizona

Posted 04 February 2016 - 03:01 PM

Now for the challenge:

 

Show, step by step in detail, the process by which the theory of evolution, which introduces entirely new species, can be arrived at by using the scientific method.

 

I have to say that I am honestly surprised that there are no takers for my challenge.

 

What with all the blustering and calling me a liar when I stated that evolutionists claim that the theory of evolution is exempt from the scientific method I honestly believed that the evos on this board would welcome the opportunity to set the record straight once and for all.

 

So, what am I missing here? Is the challenge misstated somehow? Is it the steps of the scientific method that I offered that are wrong? Are the parameters too restrictive?

 

What do I need to do to get folks to start the ball rolling on this important topic?



#4 Bmaxdlux

Bmaxdlux

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 56
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Southern Oregon

Posted 04 February 2016 - 04:31 PM



I have to say that I am honestly surprised that there are no takers for my challenge.

>I'm not surprised one bit<

 
What with all the blustering and calling me a liar when I stated that evolutionists claim that the theory of evolution is exempt from the scientific method I honestly believed that the evos on this board would welcome the opportunity to set the record straight once and for all.
 
So, what am I missing here? Is the challenge misstated somehow? Is it the steps of the scientific method that I offered that are wrong? Are the parameters too restrictive?
 
> Your not missing a thing nor have you offered anything unreasonable<


What do I need to do to get folks to start the ball rolling on this important topic?



Dave,

The sad fact is that you are (rightfully) requiring
them to apply scientific principles to explain
a process that violates natural laws.

In short, you're asking them to stand on legs they
simply don't have.

Nice try though.

Ah well... back to the crickets.

Max ;)

#5 Dave

Dave

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 627 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 65
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Arizona

Posted 04 February 2016 - 05:11 PM


Dave,

The sad fact is that you are (rightfully) requiring
them to apply scientific principles to explain
a process that violates natural laws.

In short, you're asking them to stand on legs they
simply don't have.

Nice try though.

Ah well... back to the crickets.

Max ;)

 

This is pretty straightforward stuff. If I had a dollar for every time recently that someone railed on me because I was too stupid to understand that evolution is a "settled fact" I'd be rich right now. All I am asking is for them to show me that settled fact ... the scientific way.

 

Well, anyway, I was hoping then that they would at least be intellectually honest enough to admit that they can't or won't do it. What do you suppose that tells us about how much they truly believe in evolution as fact. It doesn't look good for them, does it?



#6 Bmaxdlux

Bmaxdlux

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 36 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 56
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Southern Oregon

Posted 04 February 2016 - 06:23 PM

I think the silence from the non-Christian camp
pretty much sums it all up.

Regards.

Max ;)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users