HugATree

It may very well be a relationship but its also called a religion, by your very own logic no religions exist because everyone has a relationship with their deity; god, allah, brahman, shiva.. The fact is its better to look up the correct meaning of words rather than inventing them. Edit: Looking at the rest of your post you're basically peddling the same unsupported scripted religious babble.

Which only applies to followers of Islam, the cartoons weren't drawn by Muslims. Why aren't these rioters upset over Christians drawing Jesus? its still mocking Islam And depicting Jews as Nazis doesn't hurt anyone? Atleast they didn't got nuts at the Muslim artists.

Which only applies to followers of Islam, the cartoons weren't drawn by Muslims. Why aren't these rioters upset over Christians drawing Jesus?

There's cartoons drawn by Muslims of Americans and Jews murdering people, some kinda sick. These ones rioting need to deal with it.

:roll: What does this have to do with the big bang? This is something Kent Hovind would say and proclaim its evolution.

Black holes are not a point of infinite gravity; if they were we would all be sucked into one, as you can see this doesnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t happen. A black hole has the exact same mass/gravity as normal objects. If the Earth turned into a black hole it would still have the gravity of 9.8m/s, the moon will orbit ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹Ãâblack hole EarthÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ as if nothing happened. Hawkings specifically used the word infinite. As for the Earth into a black hole? Not possible... The closest I've heard they are infinite points, there is no limit to their mass. Infinite gravity would have the whole universe pulled in the moment the first one formed.

Why would any of these happen? The magnetic field protects the earth from radiation, you're more likely to see what you described if gravity of the sun or earths momentum was greatly disturbed.

It does it every 11 years did you know that? and Earth does it to every couple of hundred of thousand years. The only people that need fear are creationists and everyone else who thinks the earth or life is less than 10,000 years old. I've heard of the 11-year sunspot cycle, and found out afew years ago the suns magnetic poles had flipped. The article explains what happens linking the 2 together

By this http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast15feb_1.htm the suns magnetic poles have flipped, and will do it again in 2012.

Thats kind of like http://www.zetatalk.com Some woman believes aliens are sending her messages about some pole shift, that will be caused by 12th planet which also has aliens on it; these aliens were worshipped as gods in the ancient times. It was meant to happen in May 2003, when that came and gone she said the aliens were just testing people for when it really happens.

I imagine alot of planets in the universe would have bacteria on them.

Still doesn't make it "just a theory", its alot more than that. Actually, its still a scientific theory. Theories can be developed enough to be taught and accepted - but they are still theories. Look up evolution anywhere - its the "Theory of Evolution." Calling it just a theory is saying its nothing more than a theory, which is wrong. Scientific sources will also call it "The Scientific Theory of Evolution", or "modern evolutionary synthesis". Biologists have seen things evolve, just not to the extent creationists demand. No, you are missing the point. Biologists have seen things evolve - yes. And humans. There is no 100% proof for any scientific claims. They have evidence we are a result of evolution, just as every other animal on earth. Seeing a event directly isn't the only form of evidence, evidence is left even if no one was around to see it.

Still doesn't make it "just a theory", its alot more than that. Biologists have seen things evolve, just not to the extent creationists demand.

Scientific theories are not 100% solid fact. You realise nothing in science is 100% fact? Plenty of things are fact. Things we observe happen. For instance, decompisition is a fact. We can watch it happen. The explanations are not 100% fact, with enough evidence you can change any scientific theory or law. They are not 100% absolute and can be changed, if it wasn't the case new evidence would be ignored. This isn't what defines it as a scientific theory. Scientific theories are explanations for observed phenomena. Even if you watched apes evolve into humans, you'd still need an explanation therefore it would still be a scientific theory.

Scientific theories are not 100% solid fact. You realise nothing in science is 100% fact? No one said they were.

Well, I wouldn't exactly have expected you to read the past few pages where we've already discussed this... http://forum.tip.it/viewtopic.php?p=2481783#2481783 Try again. Oh, I've read it. You even make the uneducated claim 'Its just a theory' in that too. Interesting that thoses who don't understand scientific terms are the very same ones trying to re-define them.

It's not fact, it's a theory about things we call 'facts' (whether that means they're 100% true depends on your definition of 100% true). And I'm not arguing it shouldn't be tought, I'm arguing we should also teach students the relativity of the whole issue - it's just a theory, and there are many critics of it. No its not just a theory, how many times must that be explained? There exists critics of the spherical earth, like these they can complain and put forth baseless claims right up to their death; its still baseless claims. Reality is narrow.

It seems you're missing the point, the scientific theory of Evolution is a scientific theory, ID isn't even a testable hypothesis. Sure, teach the alternatives if you can find one. Evolution has made predictions that currently test true, all life on earth sharing a common ancestor; research in genetics have shown this to be accurate. Again, if you know of any alternative theories (theory in the scientific context); you should tell someone. I don't think Hannibal is missing the point - in fact I think you just restated exactly what he said and what I said at the beginning of this post. I read it he said it made no scientific predictions, I pointed out one of the biggest predictions. I apologise if I read it wrong.

It seems you're missing the point, the scientific theory of Evolution is a scientific theory, ID isn't even a testable hypothesis. Sure, teach the alternatives if you can find one. Evolution has made predictions that currently test true, all life on earth sharing a common ancestor; research in genetics have shown this to be accurate. Again, if you know of any alternative theories (theory in the scientific context); you should tell someone.

Hear hear! Keep these baseless insults coming, people! Can you show me where I said that?

Science doesn't support their drivel, so they go to the ignorant public; anything to get their fairytale taught. There are NO other theories explaining genetic diversity. Its not fear science is fighting, its ignorance.

A scientific law is a description of a natural phenomenon. A scientific theory is an explanation for facts and observations about the natural world.

Do you understand what a scientific theory is? Its theory. Look the word up. Theory. That's all that needs to be said I think but I will say there is a difference between scientific theory and scientific law. Scientific theories are testable. This is why the creation theory never will be a scientific theory. Some people here seem to be confusing objective truth and subjective truth.

Your brain needs energy to work, there will also be memory of your thought; you haven't really created energy at all.

Who would you offend by saying merry christmas? I know some Christians who refuse to celebrate it because it has roots in non-christian beliefs, guess they could find it offensive.