chee wrote:There's no evidence for whatever you think is going on.

What about the gobstopper paradox?

Googled it, nothing showed up. Explain?

Jackson wrote:

The only evidence is the fossil evidence that leads the conclusion that we evolved from other animals.

I'm comparing two different things: evolution, a valid scientific theory with evidence to back it up, and your "theory" with no evidence to back it up.

Science shows us that we have senses, evolved slowly, due to our environment. It does not show our brains floating in space, with some Space Daddy plugging us into a computer, or whatever you think is going on.

Show me evidence that someone is controlling my mind, distorting reality. You can't. It's not a valid argument without evidence.

There's no concrete evidence of the evolution theory. That's why it's called a theory, same thing goes to the simulation theory. However, even if there is no evidence or whatsoever, there is still a possibility for a theory to be true.

Jackson wrote:There's no concrete evidence of the evolution theory. That's why it's called a theory, same thing goes to the simulation theory. However, even if there is no evidence or whatsoever, there is still a possibility for a theory to be true.

Yes, there is. I explained it before, but a scientific theory isn't really just a "theory", its the explanation of how a law works. It's considered fact as long as there is no contradicting evidence.

Possibility for a "theory" to be true without evidence, is very very very slim. It's like saying there is no evidence for the flying spaghetti monster, or a giant invisible intangible purple T-Rex sitting on my bed, but there's a possibility that it might be true.

Jackson wrote:There's no concrete evidence of the evolution theory.

1.) Are you aware of the scientific defenition of the word "theory"?
2.) Evolution is a FACT. Mounds of evidence support it, and no evidence goes against it. Therefore, until legitamate evidence comes along that is contray to evolution, it's a fact. Deal with it. The evidence that supports evolution is as concrete as it gets pal.
3.) Our universe not existing and being part of someones subconsious is not a theory. It's not falsifiable nor testable, therefore it's not a theory and is useless to the scientific community.

To simplify:

Conventional Theory = *wakes up drunk in the middle of the night* "Okay you guys, get this! I got this theory that we actually came from, Wait for it... MONKEYS!!! Isn't that fucked up!?

Scientific Theory = Okay you guys, get this! I went to the Galapagos for like, 5 years JUST to study the variation between species, 'cause the Galapagos Islands have like, a bajillion different animals. Then I gathered a balls-load of facts which ALL support this scientific theory I got goin' on. Isn't that fucked up!?

(P.S. I'm not sure if that's exactly how Darwin spoke, so don't hold me to it.)

chee wrote: Yes, there is. I explained it before, but a scientific theory isn't really just a "theory", its the explanation of how a law works. It's considered fact as long as there is no contradicting evidence.

The evolution theory has many contradicting evidence.

Evolution is a FACT.

How would you define "FACT"?

Jackson wrote:

chee wrote: Yes, there is. I explained it before, but a scientific theory isn't really just a "theory", its the explanation of how a law works. It's considered fact as long as there is no contradicting evidence.

The evolution theory has many contradicting evidence.

Like what? A bunny fossil that is old as a dinosaur?

chee wrote: Like what? A bunny fossil that is old as a dinosaur?

Where did you see that? If it is media, then it is an unreliable source.

Jackson wrote:

chee wrote: Like what? A bunny fossil that is old as a dinosaur?

Where did you see that? If it is media, then it is an unreliable source.

What? lol, no, I was joking. There are no bunny fossils within that era.