Scientific proof

[PLAYER57832]

From the "only for antievolutionists" thread ---

Gravity, thermodynamics and such can be proven through experiments in any ordinary lab yet evolution requires great leaps of faith in the certainty of a relatively small scientific community.

Gravity can be proven now? Please Illuminate us!!!!!



Anyway, I I started with the above quote, but maybe we need a thread where people can post, plain and simply, proofs or links to specific proofs for specific scientific theories?

Either way.. please post proof of the Theory of Gravity.

Thermodynamics is an interesting bit, because its simply a law.. an explanation for how things work in our world, given the physical properties of our reality. Its not really "proven" per se, its revealed and delineated, within certain perameters. Many people citing this "law" are unware of the parameters. It is not an impeachable, irrefutable law in all circumstances of our universe... never mind all potential universes or the beginning of our universe.

[2dimes]

You tell him girl. Gravity's just a bunch of bologna made up by atheists to debunk religion. Right?

Of course he might not be able to find this, since your crack team of scientists can rarely make links or quotes that function correctly.

[tzor]

From the "only for antievolutionists" thread ---

Gravity, thermodynamics and such can be proven through experiments in any ordinary lab yet evolution requires great leaps of faith in the certainty of a relatively small scientific community.

Gravity can be proven now? Please Illuminate us!!!!!

Didn't I make the same argument in that thread. You don't have to "prove" the super symmetric standard model to prove general relativity, just as you don't have to prove a valid ambeogenisis model to prove evolution in general. But yes, general relativity has more or less been "proven."

But that's besides the point; gravity has tests that can be conducted on ones lifetime. If you can't do that, it's going to be hard to test. There are a lot of things that occur on a timescale that's large; evolution is one of them.

[sundance123]

From the "only for antievolutionists" thread ---

Either way.. please post proof of the Theory of Gravity.

Thermodynamics is an interesting bit, because its simply a law.

It is worth pointing out that Newtonian Gravity was posited as a Law also, and has held up well at the level of the solar system. For interstellar theories of Gravity look no further than Einstein and evidence supporting His (that right folks I capitalised 'His' when referring to Einstein) theory can be found in the prediction of gravitational lensing which has been observed, most notably, in 1919.

It is worth noting that evidence supports a theory but, physical laws require proof. (Even though they may be theories)

[maasman]

I remember reading something about E.Coli being proven to evolve. I'll try to find a link but it was very interesting. I'm pretty sure I read it from a thread in here as well.

[tzor]

It is worth pointing out that Newtonian Gravity was posited as a Law also, and has held up well at the level of the solar system.

Actually it didn't. It started to fail close into the sun. This lead to the theory of the planet Vulcan. It took Eisenstein to explain the wobble in Mercury.

[BigBallinStalin]

So the speed of light is not 3 x 10^8 m/s?

[tzor]

So the speed of light is not 3 x 10^8 m/s?

I'm not touching that one ... too many terms that can easily be abused. (Speed, light)

How about "the velocity of the particle known as the photon?"

[maasman]

So the speed of light is not 3 x 10^8 m/s?

Nope, 299,792,458 m/s

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_experiment

[jonesthecurl]

I already told you all that gravity is caused by invisible badgers - and you can't prove that's not so.

[sundance123]

It is worth pointing out that Newtonian Gravity was posited as a Law also, and has held up well at the level of the solar system.

Actually it didn't. It started to fail close into the sun. This lead to the theory of the planet Vulcan. It took Eisenstein to explain the wobble in Mercury.

You are splitting hairs for the sake of disagreement, I say held up well you say failed.

[BigBallinStalin]

So the speed of light is not 3 x 10^8 m/s?

Nope, 299,792,458 m/s

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_experiment

Wrong!, it's 173 AU per day!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_thermodynamics

[jonesthecurl]

It is worth pointing out that Newtonian Gravity was posited as a Law also, and has held up well at the level of the solar system.

Actually it didn't. It started to fail close into the sun. This lead to the theory of the planet Vulcan. It took Eisenstein to explain the wobble in Mercury.

Eisenstein? Are you certain about that?

[oVo]

It's been stated that the larger the mass the greater the gravitational pull. If this were actually true obese people would be very attractive. Black holes can't be empty spaces since they have tremendous gravitational pull. Hence the oft quoted phrase, "once you go black, you never go back."

[Funkyterrance]

Wow, a thread started in my honor? I'm blushing!
You've got me player, no theory can be proven as such or it wouldn't be a "theory". I suppose I should have written "phenomenon that can be recreated in a lab" or some such as that was what I meant. "Hard science", as it were. In my defense it was quite late and I was very tired. Now that I've admitted my mistake, what's going to happen to this thread? Personally I think it's bad form to take a quote from a "closed" thread and start another based on an error of inattention but that's just me.
Oh and by the way... It's on, girl.

[ManBungalow]

There's the argument that - while there is presumably some 'truth' in the workings of the universe - we only observe them, well, by observing the superficial outcomes of the workings. Which is why Newton's laws - while accurate for almost all intents and purposes - have been disproved and expanded on. This is strikingly similar, but more structured, to the practice of interpreting apparent signs from God/whatever, and trying to explain the why. So, until we know everything, we can't prove anything.

Epistemological arguments also apply.

[PLAYER57832]

Wow, a thread started in my honor? I'm blushing!
You've got me player, no theory can be proven as such or it wouldn't be a "theory". I suppose I should have written "phenomenon that can be recreated in a lab" or some such as that was what I meant. "Hard science", as it were. In my defense it was quite late and I was very tired. Now that I've admitted my mistake, what's going to happen to this thread? Personally I think it's bad form to take a quote from a "closed" thread and start another based on an error of inattention but that's just me.
Oh and by the way... It's on, girl.

Closed? really.. seems its continuing just fine.

[HardAttack]

From the "only for antievolutionists" thread ---

Gravity, thermodynamics and such can be proven through experiments in any ordinary lab yet evolution requires great leaps of faith in the certainty of a relatively small scientific community.

Gravity can be proven now? Please Illuminate us!!!!!



Anyway, I I started with the above quote, but maybe we need a thread where people can post, plain and simply, proofs or links to specific proofs for specific scientific theories?

Either way.. please post proof of the Theory of Gravity.

Thermodynamics is an interesting bit, because its simply a law.. an explanation for how things work in our world, given the physical properties of our reality. Its not really "proven" per se, its revealed and delineated, within certain perameters. Many people citing this "law" are unware of the parameters. It is not an impeachable, irrefutable law in all circumstances of our universe... never mind all potential universes or the beginning of our universe.

Well, what is it that you are pointingo out here mate ? If you mean to say the gravity doesnt exist ? Or if you need a proof for the gravity that it exists ?

[2dimes]

Closed? really.. seems its continuing just fine.

This is your real opinion?

[PLAYER57832]

From the "only for antievolutionists" thread ---

Gravity, thermodynamics and such can be proven through experiments in any ordinary lab yet evolution requires great leaps of faith in the certainty of a relatively small scientific community.

Gravity can be proven now? Please Illuminate us!!!!!



Anyway, I I started with the above quote, but maybe we need a thread where people can post, plain and simply, proofs or links to specific proofs for specific scientific theories?

Either way.. please post proof of the Theory of Gravity.

Thermodynamics is an interesting bit, because its simply a law.. an explanation for how things work in our world, given the physical properties of our reality. Its not really "proven" per se, its revealed and delineated, within certain perameters. Many people citing this "law" are unware of the parameters. It is not an impeachable, irrefutable law in all circumstances of our universe... never mind all potential universes or the beginning of our universe.

Well, what is it that you are pointingo out here mate ? If you mean to say the gravity doesnt exist ? Or if you need a proof for the gravity that it exists ?

I am pointing out that science requires extremely, extremely high levels of proof... which leads to that this is why evolution is still a theory, despite proof.

BUT.. my greater desire was to just have a thread where various types of proof could be posted, for reference. Failed on that, though.

[HardAttack]

dont you think it is an enough proof why we do not have any hanging solid item on the air but they tend to drop down on the landscape unless there is any form of opposite force to beat the natural force that we call gravity.

[PLAYER57832]

dont you think it is an enough proof why we do not have any hanging solid item on the air but they tend to drop down on the landscape unless there is any form of opposite force to beat the natural force that we call gravity.

LOL... but now explain exactly how come that happens.... and provide proof, please.

[HardAttack]

dont you think it is an enough proof why we do not have any hanging solid item on the air but they tend to drop down on the landscape unless there is any form of opposite force to beat the natural force that we call gravity.

LOL... but now explain exactly how come that happens.... and provide proof, please.

well,
proof ... do you mean a mathematical description for you to accept to be a proof ?
word/meaning, proof, it is subjective i guess...

[PLAYER57832]

dont you think it is an enough proof why we do not have any hanging solid item on the air but they tend to drop down on the landscape unless there is any form of opposite force to beat the natural force that we call gravity.

LOL... but now explain exactly how come that happens.... and provide proof, please.

well,
proof ... do you mean a mathematical description for you to accept to be a proof ?
word/meaning, proof, it is subjective i guess...

No, not in science, it isn't. That is the point.

And.. jokes aside, while we know a lot about gravity, the basic theory has not been fully proven.

Even a lot of what IS proven is really only conditionally proven.. that is, "this is true given our time, universe, etc...."

[Funkyterrance]

Wow, a thread started in my honor? I'm blushing!
You've got me player, no theory can be proven as such or it wouldn't be a "theory". I suppose I should have written "phenomenon that can be recreated in a lab" or some such as that was what I meant. "Hard science", as it were. In my defense it was quite late and I was very tired. Now that I've admitted my mistake, what's going to happen to this thread? Personally I think it's bad form to take a quote from a "closed" thread and start another based on an error of inattention but that's just me.
Oh and by the way... It's on, girl.

Closed? really.. seems its continuing just fine.

Closed in that it's intended for those who aren't going to mock it's contents as opposed to "open" where anyone is welcome to come in and fling shit. Bringing quotes from inside that "closed" thread and posting them in another is no less inconsiderate of the ground rules set by its creator. I've got to ask: Was it you who put up those salamander breeding signs? If so, I apologize for any insult you may have received but how was I to know? If not, what's with the blatant personal attack???