New Host Of View Doesn't Know If Earth Is Flat Or Not

[Ouch-8s 5]

Mapmaker, mapmakerMake me a mapOld Map

Clearly he had tritz' software. Or wrote the date he made the map down wrong.

[sirch1 0]

After declaring she didn't "believe in evolution, period,"that right there shows her intelligence level, which I'm afraid to say isn't high

i still cant believe people dismiss evolution, it is a proven fact to not believe in it is like not believing in gravity

[jmkiser 0]

i still cant believe people dismiss evolution, it is a proven fact to not believe in it is like not believing in gravity

I know... it's frustrating...Idk how you would surviving growing up in my home town.

[coesillian 0]

i still cant believe people dismiss evolution, it is a proven fact to not believe in it is like not believing in gravity

i believe in evolution 100%, but that still doesn't make it a fact, it is indeed a theory.

[hblask 1]

i believe in evolution 100%, but that still doesn't make it a fact, it is indeed a theory.

If something has been observed, makes reliable predictions, and thoroughly explains observations, that's pretty much fact. There's no "theory" left in evolution, there's just refining the details at this point.

[coesillian 0]

If something has been observed, makes reliable predictions, and thoroughly explains observations, that's pretty much fact. There's no "theory" left in evolution, there's just refining the details at this point.

if we could predict evolution and observe it, then it would be a fact.we have not, therefore it is still a theory.

[Kaveros 0]

Well she already lost all hope when she denied evolution.To coesillian:Yes you are correct in a way.You know the world revolving around the sun? THAT is a theory too, by definition.The idea that "it is still a theory and is not fact" arguement simply doesnt stand up.

[Kaveros 0]

Dude, if you're watching The View AND reading Arianna Huffington's blog, you need to reconsider pointing the finger at other people.And the earth is young, very young.

If you can give me ANY proof that will stand up I will personally suck your dick.EDIT:And don't pull out a Ken Ham on me.

[ajs510 122]

Just today this ignorant imbecile claimed that nothing and no one predated Jesus Christ and Christianity...like the Greek and Roman cultures were just some fairy tale and the Pyramids at Giza are only a little bit older than the Luxor. As if the term "BC" only refers to the time of dinosaurs and wooly mammoths, like there weren't people walking around this planet on two legs for 198,000 years *before* her dear and fluffy lord was born. It's almost shocking how blatantly, horrifically stupid you can be and still get yourself on TV where other people might actually take you or your opinions seriously.

[coesillian 0]

ya nevermind, it's all semantics really, i understand evolution, this guy explains the differences wellStephen Jay Gould:

• In the American vernacular, “theory” often means “imperfect fact” — part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist argument: evolution is “only” a theory and intense debate now rages about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and scientists can’t even make up their minds about the theory, then what confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): “Well, it is a theory. It is a scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in the world of science — that is, not believed in the scientific community to be as infallible as it once was.

• Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world’s data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don’t go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein’s theory of gravitation replaced Newton’s in this century, but apples didn’t suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin’s proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.

• Moreover, “fact” doesn’t mean “absolute certainty”; there ain’t no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are NOT about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us falsely for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science “fact” can only mean “confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent.” I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.

• Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually emphasized the difference between his two great and separate accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a theory — natural selection — to explain the mechanism of evolution.