I was asked a question by a student I was teaching the theory of evolution and he asked if there has been anytime ideas in science flipped drastically that new evidence suggested the directed opposite of what we knew, like can creationism flip scientific fundamental ideas on evolution?. It’s an interesting question because most people think that’s how science works but that’s not how it really works.

Laws, theories and principles maybe fallible but the new evidence usually do not suggest a direct opposite of what has been known outrightly, however it builds upon the knowledge and gives better understanding of what we knew. The new evidence usually modifies the existing idea, it doesn’t flipped it because the existing idea must have been tested many times.

Ideas don’t flip, better knowledge are gained. it’s very impossible that the idea of evolution of life will suddenly change and become that life has been immutable ever since. I will tell you why. Although, it doesn’t mean that we won’t accept it if anyone brings forward a method to test creation just as evolution as been tested million times and it works.

In science, If you perform an experiment to demonstrate the conduct of reality, maybe I don’t agree with that experiment because I think you are intentionally or passively bias, so I’m going to doubt you by performing the same experiment to see if I get the same result. If I get the same result, then maybe the idea is reality. But still in science, two repeated result is not statistically significant enough, more and more scientists come and repeat the experiments even using some other experimental design, this is why creationism doesn’t make it in science, it doesn’t pass the test every time. This gives science a very vital advantage in authenticity. If all of the many scientists get same results then that result is obviously a reality. It becomes very difficult to flip that idea in future, it doesn’t become overturned.
What becomes overturned are ideas around that discovered reality that hasn’t been experimentally verified.

Since Galileo, modern science started officially with its methods of getting empirical evidence, nothing it has said it’s true has ever been totally flipped. Like all the ideas of a theory flipped, no. Never happened

For example, Newton has law of motion and gravity, most people have the misconception that Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity flipped Newton’s laws. No, not the case. Newton’s law didn’t get the big picture, it could only account for reality at low speed and gravity. Newton laws breaks down at huge speed and gravity, Einstein’s theory of relativity enlarged the view and explained what happened at high speed and gravity. At low speed and gravity, theory of relativity will give same figures as Newton’s law.
Newton’s law still works perfectly, we still lunch rockets, satellites and make cars with Newton’s laws. It means that Newton’s law will work perfectly on earth within that range of speed and gravity humans can actively comprehend with their senses but at higher figures like in blackholes and speed of light, Newton’s law breaks down.
Another example is Darwin’s theory of evolution, he was wrong on the idea of genes but very accurate on natural selection, his theory wasn’t flipped when genes and their structures were discovered. The discovery of gene created more knowledge, it didn’t flip Darwin’s fundamental ideas which has been tested by many scientists overtime to be true.

So no, there’s never going to be a time when Science will drop theory of evolution and say life has been immutable. The idea around the theory might change but the fundamentals of life evolving has been tested millions of times and has given same results. It’s not gonna change.

Do Thieves, Liars, Cheats ever stop seeking occasion to steal, lie or cheat?

So also can Anti-God Never stop to accept God's Truth as Proven by Nature.

Workch:

I was asked a question by a student I was teaching the theory of evolution and he asked if there has been anytime ideas in science flipped drastically that new evidence suggested the directed opposite of what we knew, like can creationism flip scientific fundamental ideas on evolution?.

Chai, you can Lie Ooo! 28 year old wey dry find job, na only secondary school student e fit teach and no secondary student get time to ask dis stupid question.

So why you know just continue your normal soliloquy.

Workch:

In science, If you perform an experiment to demonstrate the conduct of reality, maybe I don’t agree with that experiment because I think you are intentionally or passively bias, so I’m going to doubt you by performing the same experiment to see if I get the same result. If I get the same result, then MAYBE the idea is reality. But still in science, two repeated result is not statistically significant enough, more and more scientists come and repeat the experiments even using some other experimental design, this is why creationism doesn’t make it in science, it doesn’t pass the test every time.

You still put "may be" in the certainty of science's experiment BUT For the Bible, No Maybe was allowed O. IS THIS NOT THE DEFINITION OF BIAS?

I wonder if you maybe that one day you would not be able to walk on the ground because reality has changed.

Also along the way, is there a time a stone is dropped in water and it does not sink no matter how many times the experiment is carried out?

Or is there a time a teaspoon of table salt salt is put in a bowl of water, that it would not be invisible to the eye?

Nothing Beats Natural Truths and No Anti-God scientists can ever beat Natural Truth.

Especially as that theory of evolution is not a myth, right?

HedwigesMaduro:
Especially as that theory of evolution is not a myth, right?

Yes, it’s not

Workch:
Yes, it’s not

Ok. So prove it. By the way, how doesn't it sound stvpid to "intelligent" atheists that they don't believe there's a creator, but an explosion would create an orderly universe? As in, how does it sound if someone comes to you and says Toyota cars were not created, but came into being by the atom bomb detonation on Hiroshima an Nagasaki? Stvpid, right? At least to me. Don't know about you, though.

HedwigesMaduro:


Ok. So prove it. By the way, how doesn't it sound stvpid to "intelligent" atheists that they don't believe there's a creator, but an explosion would create an orderly universe? As in, how does it sound if someone comes to you and says Toyota cars were not created, but came into being by the atom bomb detonation on Hiroshima an Nagasaki? Stvpid, right? At least to me. Don't know about you, though.

Prove what?

It's sounds stupid that you think a creation of Toyota which is within the natural and it's testable can be compared to supernatural creation which cannot be tested.

That's a fallacy of faulty equivalence

Workch:
Prove what?

It's sounds stupid that you think a creation of Toyota which is within the natural and it's testable can be compared to supernatural creation which cannot be tested.

That's a fallacy of faulty equivalence

While it doesn't sound stupid that an explosion would create the universe? Especially as all the explosions you've ever heard of have given rise to skyscrapers and factories? Really?

HedwigesMaduro:


Ok. So prove it. By the way, how doesn't it sound stvpid to "intelligent" atheists that they don't believe there's a creator, but an explosion would create an orderly universe? As in, how does it sound if someone comes to you and says Toyota cars were not created, but came into being by the atom bomb detonation on Hiroshima an Nagasaki? Stvpid, right? At least to me. Don't know about you, though.

Nobody can adequately prove the evolution theory because it's a lie unlike the creation that has so much EVIDENCES around us.

The reason why some prefer evolution theory to creation is because it doesn't demand obedience from them, the creation book talks about obedience to some life saying instructions but evolution theory is based on whatever each person feels in his heart.
That's the secret behind their love for the evolution theory, nobody can prove it's real!

Workch:
Yes, it’s not

I am sure you already know that Evolution Theory was Banned, even in the Country of the people whom you love and have as your god.

"In 1968, the US Supreme Court ruled on Epperson v. Arkansas, another challenge to these laws, and the court ruled that allowing the teaching of creation, while disallowing the teaching of evolution, advanced a religion"

NO. AS LONG AS SCIENCE HAS NOT COME TO TERMS WITH THE MYTH THAT A SPEC OF GOD IS A MILLION YEARS IN THE EYES OF MAN.

Dtruthspeaker:
Do Thieves, Liars, Cheats ever stop seeking occasion to steal, lie or cheat?

So also can Anti-God Never stop to accept God's Truth as Proven by Nature.

MOST OF THE SCIENTISTS WE HAVE NOWADAYS ARE ATHEISTS AND WORKERS IN THE DARK.

orisa37:

MOST OF THE SCIENTISTS WE HAVE NOWADAYS ARE ATHEISTS AND WORKERS IN THE DARK.

These are the days of the rapture. The Sheeps being Separated from the Goats!

HedwigesMaduro:


While it doesn't sound stupid that an explosion would create the universe? Especially as all the explosions you've ever heard of have given rise to skyscrapers and factories? Really?

Who says it was an explosion?

HedwigesMaduro:


Ok. So prove it. By the way, how doesn't it sound stvpid to "intelligent" atheists that they don't believe there's a creator, but an explosion would create an orderly universe? As in, how does it sound if someone comes to you and says Toyota cars were not created, but came into being by the atom bomb detonation on Hiroshima an Nagasaki? Stvpid, right? At least to me. Don't know about you, though.

You obviously didn’t read my post

Hmm..
There is a clear disconnect between what people think the theory of evolution is, and what it actually is.

The water is muddied to the point people don't know the facts from the fiction.

Dtruthspeaker:


I am sure you already know that Evolution Theory was Banned, even in the Country of the people whom you love and have as your god.

"In 1968, the US Supreme Court ruled on Epperson v. Arkansas, another challenge to these laws, and the court ruled that allowing the teaching of creation, while disallowing the teaching of evolution, advanced a religion"

Mr evil bastard has come to quote to us evil bastard laws he doesn't even properly comprehend. LMFAO!

HedwigesMaduro:


Ok. So prove it. By the way, how doesn't it sound stvpid to "intelligent" atheists that they don't believe there's a creator, but an explosion would create an orderly universe? As in, how does it sound if someone comes to you and says Toyota cars were not created, but came into being by the atom bomb detonation on Hiroshima an Nagasaki? Stvpid, right? At least to me. Don't know about you, though.

Only the ignorant call it an explosion, it wasn't an explosion it was or is an expansion since the universe is still expanding. The order you see is based on the fundamental forces of the universe and how they interact with space-time, matter and energy so we have no need to posit gods or magic.

LordReed:


Mr evil bastard has come to quote to us evil bastard laws he doesn't even properly comprehend. LMFAO!

SatanReed has come as usual even when I quoted what Google expressly reported and the matter is not my business at all. But son of Evil must attack. Askor!

Dtruthspeaker:


SatanReed has come as usual even when I quoted what Google expressly reported and the matter is not my business at all. But son of Evil must attack. Askor!

No, evil bastard you goofed. LMFAO!

LordReed:


No, evil bastard you goofed. LMFAO!

Son of evil, I said it as I saw it, no slip there. .

Dtruthspeaker:


Son of evil, I said it as I saw it, no slip there. .

If you did, screenshot where you did evil bastard.

LordReed:


If you did, screenshot where you did evil bastard.

Surely, you know what a quote is and surely you know that it is identified with this mark called quotation marks (" and (" at the beginning and end of a quoted statement.

So, look up, ye Satan, if you like, you would see the direct quoted statement up there.

Here is una Google things.

Creation and evolution in public education in the United States
Language
Download PDF
Watch
Edit
In American schools, the Genesis creation narrative was generally taught as the origin of the universe and of life until Darwin's scientific theories became widely accepted. While there was some immediate backlash, organized opposition did not get underway until the Fundamentalist–Modernist Controversy broke out following World War I; several states passed laws banning the teaching of evolution while others debated them but did not pass them. The Scopes Trial was the result of a challenge to the law in Tennessee. Scopes lost his case, and further states passed laws banning the teaching of evolution.

In 1968, the US Supreme Court ruled on Epperson v. Arkansas, another challenge to these laws, and the court ruled that allowing the teaching of creation, while disallowing the teaching of evolution, advanced a religion, and therefore violated the Establishment Clause of the constitution

See am there, Evil thing, na Wiki talk am, no be me!

Dtruthspeaker:


Surely, you know what a quote is and surely you know that it is identified with this mark called quotation marks (" and (" at the beginning and end of a quoted statement.

So, look up, ye Satan, if you like, you would see the direct quoted statement up there.

Liar liar pants on fire, evil bastard. LMFAO!

Dtruthspeaker:


Surely, you know what a quote is and surely you know that it is identified with this mark called quotation marks (" and (" at the beginning and end of a quoted statement.

So, look up, ye Satan, if you like, you would see the direct quoted statement up there.

Here is una Google things.

Creation and evolution in public education in the United States
Language
Download PDF
Watch
Edit
In American schools, the Genesis creation narrative was generally taught as the origin of the universe and of life until Darwin's scientific theories became widely accepted. While there was some immediate backlash, organized opposition did not get underway until the Fundamentalist–Modernist Controversy broke out following World War I; several states passed laws banning the teaching of evolution while others debated them but did not pass them. The Scopes Trial was the result of a challenge to the law in Tennessee. Scopes lost his case, and further states passed laws banning the teaching of evolution.

In 1968, the US Supreme Court ruled on Epperson v. Arkansas, another challenge to these laws, and the court ruled that allowing the teaching of creation, while disallowing the teaching of evolution, advanced a religion, and therefore violated the Establishment Clause of the constitution

See am there, Evil thing, na Wiki talk am, no be me!

Like I said evil bastard you don't understand what you are quoting. The Supreme Court struck down any ban on teaching evolution. Get your head out your arse evil bastard. LMFAO!

LordReed:

Like I said evil bastard you don't understand what you are quoting. The Supreme Court struck down any ban on teaching evolution. Get your head out your arse evil bastard. LMFAO!

As I said Son of evil, I said it, as I saw it. Evil Thing