By Request, A Second Logic Quiz

[jn.loudnotes]

Bah. . .well I'll just get the 10 points by pointing out to you Bucc that your logic is flawed as well.

You've got the right idea, but using dogs/wolves and human skin color is a mistake.

. . .resulting in the development of new species

We just finished reading an article for environmental science that discussed the numerous biological species concepts.  Unfortunately I don't have it with me right now so I can't give you precise points, but basically the idea of a "species" is a theory.  

There are numerous definitions accepted as the differentiation between two species.  And while some acknowledge that a wolf and a dog are different enough to be of different species, others argue that they should actually be considered of the same.

Humans, as well, have not evolved into a different species through changes in skin color.  Blacks, whites, browns, tans, purple, and green, we are all the same, by any species concept.

[Brain]

well, dammnit bucc. you had to go and grade them  so soon? i was actually going to put some hard thought into this one...how 'bout another one?
 

[Dragonic]

Evolution is a Fact. You can see it happen..... Watch bacterias who slowly grow immume of antibiotic ( That too is evolution)... Bacterias are the proof.... They have short lives and so the evolution is fast with them.... many new generations... Many new dna chains and little differences between em ( What over a longer period of time might even become a new kind of bacteria)...  
So the proof that Evolution is fact is now given.

[cookie]

 Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Going along these guidelines, i present the outcome of my thought processes..

Evolution is both theory and fact.
Enormous amounts of consistent evidence have accumulated to affirm the general act of evolution.
HOWEVER
 facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them, as in the case of evolution where various aspects of it are constantly being disproved
thus the general principle of evolution is indeed fact however the the -fact- that the ideas of it are constantly changing and being disproved makes the underlying intersections of evolution theory.

i totally got a zero  

[(SiX)Ben]

Damnit. His answer of yes got the same score of my answer of an opinion! I thought I went as lazy as possible... but no! he wins. I don't get it though, Evill's posted before this. How come it says one post?

Ben

[PsYcO aSsAsSiN]

That is some dumbass pretending to be Kevill...that is why it will be deleted.

[Typhy]

Kevill fits that profile ( Dumbass ) perfectly, I wouldn't be so sure its am imposter...

[jn.loudnotes]

Actually, whoever it was was being rather clever.  And kevill's sn on this board is Scott_Kevill, not Scott Kevill.

He does have a point though, whoever he is.

Is evolution theory or fact?

Yes, it is.

Bucc, I take it you haven't seen my post yet. . .because I'm waiting for my 10 points. . .

[Scott_Kevill]

I posted it. AssAssIn is just a little delete-happy lately. I thought moderators could see email addresses anyway?

I created a new account as I couldn't remember my user name. I requested it to be sent to my email address, but it sent the password and left the username blank. It wasn't until just then that I noticed although the username was blank, it had "Dear Scott_Kevill," and even in the subject line. Hey, it was late.

I wasn't trying to get full points, since I didn't explain anything, but I liked the cleverness in the brevity of it. I've been programming far too long, but that's just boolean logic to me.

Is Evolution a Theory or Fact?

Yes.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Actually Loud, I saw it, but after all the other BS going on around us, and not being around much yesterday, I didn't want to respond to it yet.

But, I'm back from the LAN party (it was a blast) and can get back to this.

First for Loudnotes,

You don't get the 10 points that easily.  You are challenging some of my facts, that isn't a flaw in my logic.  I can provide a couple documents about linking the dog and the wolf to a common ancistor.  As for species being a theory, I'd like to see that article (and not because of this).  Species, as far as I've learned, is a category, a definition, not a theory.  

One article I've read even talks about why the domestic dog, the wolf and the coyotee are different species (most notibly cranium size and shape, major reproductive differences, and DNA differences).

For the Human attributes I mentioned, I could argue (since this was my point in that example) that humans are evolving (the changes taking place over generations in the genetics), and that someday, we could be considered different species (if you want to discuss this, I'd be happy to, as I once read a paper on it.  Don't think within hundreds of years, think many thousands of them and think about what space travel could do to us).  Human evolution could also take a step backwards too, it is not unidirectional by any means.  But I would argue that it is still evolution.

Brain, sorry, there were already many to score.  I think I'll leave post a couple more, but no more grading.  Some people seem to get upset by my subjective scale.

Dragonic, pretty good.  You could have said it better, but still a sound argument.  I'd probably have given that 3.5 - 4 (defining what you mean by evolution would have helped, along with the qualifer that if it happens, it is a fact).

Evill, ok about Evill.  This could be the real Evill, he hasn't posted here often, and could have forgotten his password.  He used the right e-mail address, and it sounds like his sense of humor.  And yes, you could argue for both if you were specific enough in your premise, as we suspect Evill is being without saying (wouldn't score high without the proof, but I always like a smart ass).

Cookie, the facts of "evolution" are not being disproved.  The theories behind specific evolutions (where species came from) is what is constantly being questioned and disproved (or vice versa).  That's the big trap.  The study of evolution is a science, much like biology is the study of life.  There are many theories within the science, but the question that life exists isn't one of them.  Another good comparison would be between Archiology and Evolution.  Both are facts, but within them are many mysteries yet to be solved.

[alaric]

Evolution is a theory.

The reason for this is simple, there are NO facts. NOTHING can be absolutely proven, NOTHING. The reason for this is simple, you can't prove that anything exists, even yourself. Ah, but what about "I think therefore I am"? Okay, sounds good, but what if it's not you that's actually thinking, what if "you" are and event in a computer program. Then it's the computer thinking for you and you don't actually exist.

Another example is the computer you are sitting in front of. If you can't prove that anything exists now, then you certainly can't prove that anything will exist a moment from now. Just because the computer you are sitting at was there this moment, doesn't mean it will be there the next moment because you can't prove it's there at all. Think of the color of the sky on a cloudless day. It's blue right? Prove it. You can't because all you have to go on is your perceptions. Perceptions that can be completely wrong or falsified.

If you can't prove anything exists then you can't prove there is a relationship between cause and effect. You could say there is an extremely high probability of cause and effect but you can't rule out random chance. Just because something has happend 999 times out of 999 times doesn't mean that it will happen again the 1000th time.

Evolution depends on certain factors causing change to occur. If there is no relationship between cause and effect, then there can be no evolution becuase you cannot prove that what we think of as "evolution" is not completly random. To take this a step further, things may continue to appear and disappear randomly from moment to moment. Remeber, you can't prove cause and effect. So how can you say it will be there? The same goes for any step in any evolutionary process. If none of it exists then there is no evolution beyond random chance of things spontaneously existing.

So because we can't prove anything exists, or that our perceptions exist, we can't have any facts, and that means evolution must be just an idea or theory. But we really can't prove that either can we?

Of course, this is all just a theory... no facts remember?  

[Ace]

The reason for this is simple, there are NO facts. NOTHING can be absolutely proven, NOTHING. The reason for this is simple, you can't prove that anything exists, even yourself. Ah, but what about "I think therefore I am"? Okay, sounds good, but what if it's not you that's actually thinking, what if "you" are and event in a computer program. Then it's the computer thinking for you and you don't actually exist.

Alaric, put the Matrix down and step away from the TV...


Bucc, I asked Evill on GR and he confirmed that this is not an imposter. Then again, if Evill were really answering with boolean logic, he would have said "1" (or "0" if he was using negative logic).

[alaric]

LOL, yeah I knew somebody was gonna reference the Matrix. I don't actually believe anything I said. I came to the thread late and I just thought I'd throw some Anti-Logic at Bucc's question to change the pace. However, I did successfully prove the problem with solipsism.

[jn.loudnotes]

Well, Bucc, if I recall you graded me down because of my specific examples, not because of my logic.

***takes his 10 points***

But the article I'll be happy to share. . .it may be online somewhere.  But it's at school at the moment so I'll have it for you soon.

As I remember it, it distinguished between dogs and wolves through cranial size and reproductive isolation.  But it also questioned whether they might be considered of the same species, as their DNA is nearly identical.

Yes, I think you successfully could argue that humans would evolve.  Afterall, I did say evolution was fact myself.  But the answer you posted had holes in it, not the answer you could have posted.

Evill, you actually used two different email addresses. . .the first was scott@GameRanger.com, the second info@GameRanger.com.  It did seem like it could be the work of a careless forger.

***Imagines what this forum would be like if evill posted more often***

[Scott_Kevill]

Evill, you actually used two different email addresses. . .the first was scott@GameRanger.com, the second info@GameRanger.com.  It did seem like it could be the work of a careless forger.

If I created a second account, then obviously it would be a second email address.

Additionally, why could the second address have been forged and not the first as well?

[PsYcO aSsAsSiN]

Yeah, sorry about that Evill...thought that was some chump impersonating you. If I remember you correctly, you were not one to give one word answers that seemed basic.

As for the two email address' we knew the first one wasn't a forgery because of the issue you responded on (Peekay et.al), and I thought the second was a fake since you already had an account established on the forums.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

LOL, I don't give them up that easilly Loud.  I said prove me wrong.  You've taken a couple good swings, but I haven't actually seen anything that says that the domestic dog and grey wolf are the same species.  I have read that they are different species, in many places.  So right now you are in the fight, but you haven't earned them yet.

One other thing, I believe that domestic dogs and wolves are different species is a documented fact.  People can argue that it's not, just like I can argue that the sky isn't blue or the sun isn't yellow.  There needs to be something actually saying that they are the same species.

It's a good effort so far though.

And be careful what you wish for Loudnotes, I see Evill is here again.  Maybe the debates around here can step up a notch or two with his participation.  I don't think we've had a point of view from down-under here.

[|MP|Cringe]

Evolution is Both a theory and a fact.
Since evolution is such a broad term, there is Darwin's Theory of Evolution, dealing with the progression of life on earth from the dinosaurs to the apes to humans (i skipped lots of steps there), and there is the Fact of Evolution, where the Bacterium colony (is thats what its called) evolves to become resistant to certain antibiotics through Natural Selection.
-??h=

[Deadeye]

cringe, you should have read more carefully.  it's not darwin's theory of evolution.  it's his theories ON evollution "the origin of the species".  

you just fell into the classic blunder.  

it wasn't evolution as a fact that was questioned.  it was his theories on what evolved from what, and the relationships between species that people still question.  

big difference.

[jn.loudnotes]

I guess we just trusted you Evill. . .were we wrong to do so ?

Bucc I'll find that article for you. . .

And I don't mind Evill posting more often. . .should I?