Gary Lineker in a spot of bother

[Acker79]

You see, 'theory' is the key word here. It's just a theory which hasn't been proven yet.

Evolution is Not Just a Theory: home

The Theory of Evolution is a theory, but guess what? When scientists use the word theory, it has a different meaning to normal everyday use. That's right, it all comes down to the multiple meanings of the word theory. If you said to a scientist that you didn't believe in evolution because it was "just a theory", they'd probably be a bit puzzled.

In everyday use, theory means a guess or a hunch, something that maybe needs proof. In science, a theory is not a guess, not a hunch. It's a well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations. It ties together all the facts about something, providing an explanation that fits all the observations and can be used to make predictions. In science, theory is the ultimate goal, the explanation. It's as close to proven as anything in science can be.​

 

[beorhthelm]

"It's a stupid remark and sheer ignorance," said Ajmal Masroor, a London based imam. "This is very unprofessional from a football legend who is supposed to be a role model.

yep, it is ignorance, because Linker hasnt wasted his life learning the religious practices of the world. he's a football presenter, he said what he saw, its not mocking or belittling unless one is ignorant to the fact that not everyone is muslim or familar with muslim culture.

they really, really need to have a reformation or enlightenment moment in islam and grow up.

 

[beorhthelm]

You see, 'theory' is the key word here. It's just a theory which hasn't been proven yet.

Electromagnetism is a theory. Gravity is theory. please feel free to disprove either of these. or you could learn what scientific theory means. you could probably learn alot, but thats somewhere to start so you dont misunderstand what the "theory of evolution" means. its the best explaination there currently is.

 

[Guy Crouchback]

Evolution is Not Just a Theory

Oh, really? So it has been proven? After all those years, they have finally found
the missing link? After all those cases of falsified or scientifically inaccurate "evidence",
they've finally managed to find the proof?

Amazing! How could I have missed that?

Would you be so kind as to post a link for me? Surely such a breakthrough
in science must have been announced all over the Internet?

 

[Acker79]

they really, really need to have a reformation or enlightenment moment in islam and grow up.

I don't know if this link is viewable generally (I have a headers modifier thing, which used to allow me to watch these videos. Some people elsewhere have complained modify headers no longer works for the daily show, but I can still watch it, though the show now airs on comedy central here too, so might be viewable normally in the UK on that website now)

EDIT: Actual Democalypse 2012 - Islam's Growing Pains - The Daily Show with Jon Stewart - 09/17/12 - Video Clip | Comedy Central

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Exactly! And knowing Gary Lineker to be a gentlemen on the pitch and outside it,
I am quite sure he didn't mean to insult anybody.

I'm sure quite a few ladies would disagree.

As for the insult, I am beginning to give up on the whole insult business. There are plenty of people waiting to be offended. Maybe it makes them feel alive. I think they are all dicks, personally.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Religion is a load of bollocks and the sooner the whole world realise it the better

Oh, give it a rest!

 

[Acker79]

Oh, really? So it has been proven? After all those years, they have finally found
the missing link? After all those cases of falsified or scientifically inaccurate "evidence",
they've finally managed to find the proof?

Amazing! How could I have missed that?

Would you be so kind as to post a link for me? Surely such a breakthrough
in science must have been announced all over the Internet?

Missing link between man and apes found - Telegraph - 2010
BBC News - New human species identified from Kenya fossils - 2012

Do you realise how complex evolution is? How new fossils are constantly being found and how dismissing evoluton because of this fabled "missing link" is like not believing in christianity because your bible is missing a page?

A hypothesis was put forward. It has been tested rigorously and passed. Every fossil ever found fits this hypothesis so well. Science is constantly discovering more fossils, but the human body, most species are not resilient enough to survive the thousands of years, but the ones that do and have been found (and new fossils are regularly being found - Fossils : Discovery News) all fit in with this hypothesis. This hypothesis has survived so much testing and been strengthened by every new fossil found that evolutio has progressed to a "scientific theory" or what laymen call "fact".

The method of evolution is less certain.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Arguing about religion in the 21st centuary is ridiculous .Darwin proved it to be bollox in the 19th centuary

No, he didn't, if this is the normal rubbish about you can't believe in the theory of evolution if you are a Christian because you have to believe that God made the World in Six days. Most sensible people accept the creation story as just that - a STORY.

Now back to the real story, it was a fairly daft thing to say.

 

[South Stand Bonfire]

Jesus Saves!



But CMS will score on the rebound...

Resists temptation to crack the old joke with the punchline "move St John to inside right".

OK. Almost resists.

 

[Southwick_Seagull]

Steve Hughes sums up the whole notion of causing offence perfectly:

 

[Guy Crouchback]

Missing link between man and apes found - Telegraph - 2010
BBC News - New human species identified from Kenya fossils - 2012

Do you realise that there have been hundreds of such reports on finding the missing link,
and they all turned out to be either falsifications or scientifically innacurate? Tell ya what,
Acker, if the real missing link is finally found and Darwin's theory proven (and when
that happens we can all be sure the entire world will hear about it), I shall send you a crate
of best Polish vodka. Until then it's still "from goo to you by way of the zoo"
(an oversimplification, I know, but that's the gist of it, right?)

Do you realise how complex evolution is? How new fossils are constantly being found and how
dismissing evoluton because of this fabled "missing link" is like not believing in christianity
because your bible is missing a page?

Of course I realise they have been digging out those fossils for over 150 years now,
but they still haven't found the missing link, have they? Besides, you can't very well
draw comparisons between a scientific theory and Christian religion.
Words 'faith' and 'knowledge' belong to two different semantic categories and if we start
mixing them up we shall arrive at nonsensical conclusions or gross oversimplifications.

Anyway, don't get me wrong - while looking at some people I do not find the theory
of evolution to be entirely unlikely to turn out to be true one day. However, until that
happens, being a cautious man, I shall remain sceptical.

 

[Acker79]

Anyway, don't get me wrong - while looking at some people I do not find the theory
of evolution to be entirely unlikely to turn out to be true one day. However, until that
happens, being cautious man, I shall remain sceptical.

It's not being sceptical. It's denying fact. Evolution doesn't rely on the missing link for it's authenticity, because it has so much other evidence supporting it.

 

[Guy Crouchback]

It's not being sceptical. It's denying fact. Evolution doesn't rely on the missing link for it's authenticity,
because it has so much other evidence supporting it.

Once again I shall allow myself the audacity of disagreeing with you, Acker. Many people
suspected Fermat's Last Theorem to be true for many years, and they had evidence
and calculations in a lot of specific cases, but they had been unable to find the general proof
for over 350 years, if my memory is not failing me. Until those three letters Q.E.D. appeared
under the final proof of the theorem, it was, in fact, unproven (I really feel like I'm stating
the obvious here).

It's the same with the theory of evolution - until the final proof (i.e. the missing link)
is found, it remains, in fact, unproven (despite the great deal of what would seem to
be credible evidence supporting it).

Simple as that.

 

[BadFish]

It's not being sceptical. It's denying fact. Evolution doesn't rely on the missing link for it's authenticity, because it has so much other evidence supporting it.

There are parts of the theory that science hasn't proved but their are no parts of it that science has disproved, we are just waiting for science to catch up with the theory.

To me the theory of Evolution stands up for better that the theory of intelligent design.

The religious explanation of genesis has been disproved and the goal posts have had to be changed from genesis describing what happened to being a story about what happened (except to the RE teacher in my classroom who apparently believes that the story of genesis is what actually happened, because God is magic and if the bible says it it must be true).

 

[Kumquat]

Very ignorant comment from Gary. You'd think he was lawn yesterday. What a grass hole. Etc

 

[BadFish]

Once again I shall allow myself the audacity of disagreeing with you, Acker. Many people
suspected Fermat's Last Theorem to be true for many years, and they had evidence
and calculations in a lot of specific cases, but they had been unable to find the general proof
for over 350 years, if my memory is not failing me. Until those three letters Q.E.D. appeared
under the final proof of the theorem, it was, in fact, unproven (I really feel like I'm stating
the obvious here).

It's the same with the theory of evolution - until the final proof (i.e. the missing link)
is found, it remains, in fact, unproven (despite the great deal of what would seem to
be credible evidence supporting it).

Simple as that.

Given the evidence available which theory do you think is most credible?

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Nice one [MENTION=1416]Ernest[/MENTION].


Binfest alert!

 

[Silent Bob]

So we have people actually arguing creationism on NSC now? JCLs man.

Gary Lineker apologises: "I'm sorry but I'm not aware of every player's religion. "

 

[Acker79]

Once again I shall allow myself the audacity of disagreeing with you, Acker. Many people
suspected Fermat's Last Theorem to be true for many years, and they had evidence
and calculations in a lot of specific cases, but they had been unable to find the general proof
for over 350 years, if my memory is not failing me. Until those three letters Q.E.D. appeared
under the final proof of the theorem, it was, in fact, unproven (I really feel like I'm stating
the obvious here).

Just did a little research.
About math theorems:

Although the proof is necessary to produce a theorem, it is not usually considered part of the theorem. And even though more than one proof may be known for a single theorem, only one proof is required to establish the theorem's validity. The Pythagorean theorem and the law of quadratic reciprocity are contenders for the title of theorem with the greatest number of distinct proofs.​

About Fermat's Last Threorem:

This theorem was first conjectured by Pierre de Fermat in 1637, famously in the margin of a copy of Arithmetica where he claimed he had a proof that was too large to fit in the margin. No successful proof was published until 1995 despite the efforts of countless mathematicians during the 358 intervening years.​

That a proof was found actually confirmed it as a theorem, not undermined it. (Though, full disclosure: the proof relied on modern maths that were not in existence when Fermat produced his conjecture, so he was either lying about having proof, or had a much simpler proof).

Seems to me that this is a case of something being believed for a long time and then finally being show to be true. I fail to see what relevance that mathematical theorem has to the theory of evolution other than as an example of something learned people believed and were proven right over, which seems to go against your point of not believing in Evolution (which has much more evidence through out nature and the fossil record than Fermat's theorem ever had).