there isnt a fucking physicist(there may be like 2) on earth who thinks that thermodynamics has anything to do with evolution(in fact, most say it actually perpetuates it). That's been argued and killed long ago(back in the 70s-80s). Find me a peer reviewed article telling me that thermodynamics kills evolution please. I could cite dozens of critiques if you would like.
"Evolution is observable and testable. The misconception here is that science is limited to controlled experiments that are conducted in laboratories by people in white lab coats. Actually, much of science is accomplished by gathering evidence from the real world and inferring how things work. Astronomers cannot hold stars in their hands and geologists cannot go back in time, but in both cases scientists can learn a great deal by using multiple lines of evidence to make valid and useful inferences about their objects of study. The same is true of the study of the evolutionary history of life on Earth, and as a matter of fact, many mechanisms of evolution are studied through direct experimentation as in more familiar sciences.
Fossils such as Archaeopteryx give us snapshots of organisms as they adapt and change over time.
Studying modern organisms such as elephant seals can reveal specific examples of evolutionary history and bolster concepts of evolution.
Artificial selection among guppies can demonstrate microevolution in the laboratory.
Laboratory experimentation with fruit flies demonstrates the power of genetic mutation. "
stop emphasizing the word theory...
you act like faith and theory are one in the same. . Or that one must have FAITH in a theory... that's all absolutely ridiculous. That's just a classic misconception of the word theory. The word is used in an entirely different context with regards to science...
burden of proof has nothing to do with me calling you guys stupid. Theists are the ones making ridiculous claims... you have to prove ridiculous claims.
"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."
Cams, there was a point in our not so distant history that humans didn't understand gravity.. humans didn't understand that the world was round... humans thought the earth was the center of the universe... humans didn't think we evolved(oh wait). Ignorance doesn't justify belief in a fucking God(especially the Christian one). Is the science ROCK solid yet(there's still very little doubt among all researchers that the big bang happened)? Not at all...but the progress is amazing. I'm confident that scientists will unlock all the secrets of the universe in due time. The dark matter/energy issue is complicated.... you make it seem like that scientists have only explained 4% of the big bang theory... the 4% is REGULAR matter... all the stars/galaxies/planets/atoms. There are very few researchers that say that dark matter/energy has anythign to do with disproving the big bang. It's the joy of science. Solving problems, testing things etc. Again, it is downright silly to brush all the research off because it isn't absolutely rock solid(100%) and say Jesus exists.
my first quote was from a UC Berkeley article which provides some very easy to understand questions and answers about evolution:
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_faq.php#b1second quote is by Bertrand Russell on the burden of proof issue.
