Evolution, concise evidence

[Willamena]

Willamena, I challenge you to prove that you were born, using sound logic. Anyone else is welcome to have a go too, but I think its not as easy as it sounds.
Thanks for all the replies guys...

*whips out her birth certificate*

 

[BarryPrays]

Lol Willamena, I myself have a neat certificate which says I was born in 1820. Um yes... I might have made it myself and then forgotten but, hey, proof is proof...

 

[Tiberius]

nothing can be proven, only falsified, in fact everything's a theory, as there is no way to prove 2+2=4 unless we find out 2+2=monkey+candle, then it is false

But we can test things. If we test 2+2 and consistantly get the answer 4, despite many tests, despite many different ways of testing, despite people all around the world testing, despite those people improving the testing methods each time, then it's safe to say we have confirmed that 2+2=4.

After all, if it was wrong, then you wouldn't expect it to always give the same answer, especially when different methods of testing are used.

 

[JerryL]

But we can test things. If we test 2+2 and consistantly get the answer 4, despite many tests, despite many different ways of testing, despite people all around the world testing, despite those people improving the testing methods each time, then it's safe to say we have confirmed that 2+2=4.[/qoute] For years and years I dropped things and they fell down. I dropped food, and utensils and toys and bugs and all sorts of things and everything fell down. Then, after many years, I got a baloon. I dropped it and it fell up.

It's odd as I had proved that things fall down.

 

[Ryan2065]

For years and years I dropped things and they fell down. I dropped food, and utensils and toys and bugs and all sorts of things and everything fell down. Then, after many years, I got a baloon. I dropped it and it fell up.

It's odd as I had proved that things fall down.

Different argument... 2+2=4... unless you re-define 2, you are always using the same two... So in your gravity example... You always drop the same exact object rather than picking and chosing what objects you want to pick... If, for example, you do -2 + 2 = 0 you do get a different answer, but then I started using different things :angel2:

 

[Tiberius]

For years and years I dropped things and they fell down. I dropped food, and utensils and toys and bugs and all sorts of things and everything fell down. Then, after many years, I got a baloon. I dropped it and it fell up.

It's odd as I had proved that things fall down.

Ah, but you are changing the argument now. Even though gravity doesn't pull it down, it is exerting a downward force on the material of the balloon. The force is overcome by the upward force of the helium, but gravity does reduce that upwards force to a degree.

And let's not forget that without gravity there wouldn't be the differences in atmospheric pressure that cause the balloon to rise in the first place.

In short, you're an idiot if you think a helium balloon rising shows gravity suddenly changes the way it works.

 

[JerryL]

I was arguing the "if we test we consistntly get therefore" support as conclusive.

 

[doppelganger]

"2 + 2 = 4" is deductive. In fact, it's a tautology (that's why there's an "=" in it). There's no need to experiment to verify its truth other than understand the meanings of the symbols themselves.

The "law of gravity" and the "theory of evolution" are both inductive.
Their likelihood of truth is determined by repeatable experimentation and observation.

 

[Willamena]

Lol Willamena, I myself have a neat certificate which says I was born in 1820. Um yes... I might have made it myself and then forgotten but, hey, proof is proof...

But that fact that mine was made by the government *is* proof.