No More Black Holes?

[Spider-Bite]

nobody listens to the first part of the definition, only the last 2. and thank you for looking it up.

The topic of the thread talks about a "theory" just like Hawking Radiation is a theory. We will never know anything for an absolute fact. For all we know our entire existence and every piece of evidence we look at is merealy an illusion. For all we know, the Matrix is real. And in that case all of our primate ancestor skeletons weve found don't really exist. They are just figments of the program's imagination.

However just because we can't prove something beyond any doubt whatsoever, that doesn't mean we can't prove something beyond a reasonable doubt.

For example the theory of evolution has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The theory that black holes don't exist is nowhere near that. I can't really comment on a lot of physicist theories because I truly believe it would take years of college for a person to really understand that stuff.

 

[Carcharodon]

For example the theory of evolution has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Speaking as an evolutionist and budding scientist: this is incorrect. If this were the case, or if it were even close to being so reinforced and supported that it became scientific law, it will still never be proven.

Before you jump on me: nothing in science is ever proven. If you'll read scientific journals or any sort of laboratory report, especially in the realms of physics, chemistry and biology, you'll notice that the word, "proven," is almost never used. The hypotheses and theories are merely, "supported." All it takes is one test to the negative out of hundreds upon thousands of tests to the positive to debunk even a strongly supported theory. This is a fundamental principal in the scientific world, and it is not only applied to evolution.

 

[Spider-Bite]

Speaking as an evolutionist and budding scientist: this is incorrect. If this were the case, or if it were even close to being so reinforced and supported that it became scientific law, it will still never be proven.

Before you jump on me: nothing in science is ever proven. If you'll read scientific journals or any sort of laboratory report, especially in the realms of physics, chemistry and biology, you'll notice that the word, "proven," is almost never used. The hypotheses and theories are merely, "supported." All it takes is one test to the negative out of hundreds upon thousands of tests to the positive to debunk even a strongly supported theory. This is a fundamental principal in the scientific world, and it is not only applied to evolution.

I know that. As I pointed out nothing is a known fact. I don't even know for a fact that you exist, but I can assume with reasonable certainty that you do exist.

Is it possible, even remotely that Jeffery Dohmer was not a murderer? Yes. Is it likely? No.

The evidence for evolution is incredibly strong, and nobody can raise reasonable doubt against it. That's why I feel it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. We know it happened. And there is no good reason to doubt it.

 

[Carcharodon]

I know that. As I pointed out nothing is a known fact. I don't even know for a fact that you exist, but I can assume with reasonable certainty that you do exist.

Is it possible, even remotely that Jeffery Dohmer was not a murderer? Yes. Is it likely? No.

The evidence for evolution is incredibly strong, and nobody can raise reasonable doubt against it. That's why I feel it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. We know it happened. And there is no good reason to doubt it.

We don't know it happened. For it to be proven makes it fact, and we simply don't have that in science. There is plenty of reasonable doubt out there, though that doesn't mean it makes a strong case against evolution. You will never read in a scientific journal that anything has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. As a matter of fact, that's an opinion statement.

 

[AhabTheArab]

Speaking as an evolutionist and budding scientist: this is incorrect. If this were the case, or if it were even close to being so reinforced and supported that it became scientific law, it will still never be proven.

Before you jump on me: nothing in science is ever proven. If you'll read scientific journals or any sort of laboratory report, especially in the realms of physics, chemistry and biology, you'll notice that the word, "proven," is almost never used. The hypotheses and theories are merely, "supported." All it takes is one test to the negative out of hundreds upon thousands of tests to the positive to debunk even a strongly supported theory. This is a fundamental principal in the scientific world, and it is not only applied to evolution.

correct.

 

[Noir]

...Case Western are a bunch of dumb-asses, "There are no black holes, just uh.. Giant Black Stars that eat matter and turn it into massive amounts of energy and look exactly like and are very super close to the predictions of what a black hole would be like.."

Dumbasses.

 

[Spider-Bite]

We don't know it happened. For it to be proven makes it fact, and we simply don't have that in science. There is plenty of reasonable doubt out there, though that doesn't mean it makes a strong case against evolution. You will never read in a scientific journal that anything has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. As a matter of fact, that's an opinion statement.

Is it proven that Earth is not the only planet in the solar system? Is it proven that the Earth orbits the sun, and not the other way around? Is it proven that if you cut an embryo in half the other half will grow back? Is it proven frozen ice exists on Mars? Is it proven that atoms contain electrons and protons? Is it not proven that natural selection occurs, and that mutations occur in the gene pool, and that apelike humanoids walked the earth? Has it not been proven under laboratory conditions that if you apply heat to oxygen, nitrogen, and hydrogen, you will get a primordial soup full of adenine, thymine, cytosine, guanine, empty speheres, polypeptide chains, and even protein?

etc.

Many, many, many things have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. And no there isn't any reasonable doubt against the theory of evolution. The evidence supporting evolution is overwhelming, and there is absolutely no evidence to dispute it. Not even a little bit.

edit.. Actually I see the words, proven, determined, known, in scientific journals all the time. You will see it quite often in Popular Science, Discover magazine, and you will hear it used on the Discovery Science Channel all the time. It used to be called the Discovery Channel, but now it's called the Science Channel, however it's the same station.

Also hasn't forensics science and DNA testing proven many defendants to be guilty and many convicts to be innocent? When people try to say Science has never proven anything, they need to really think about that twice.

 

[redmarvel]

Scientists at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio?
Oh them, they don't know a blackhole if it's up their butt

Blackholes exists, where you think I put all of Galactus garbage at?

Also, what has been Galactus using as a toilet if black holes don't exist?

 

[Eddie Brock]

And here I thought this was a thread about racism.

Damn.

 

[Carcharodon]

Is it proven that Earth is not the only planet in the solar system? Is it proven that the Earth orbits the sun, and not the other way around? Is it proven that if you cut an embryo in half the other half will grow back? Is it proven frozen ice exists on Mars? Is it proven that atoms contain electrons and protons? Is it not proven that natural selection occurs, and that mutations occur in the gene pool, and that apelike humanoids walked the earth? Has it not been proven under laboratory conditions that if you apply heat to oxygen, nitrogen, and hydrogen, you will get a primordial soup full of adenine, thymine, cytosine, guanine, empty speheres, polypeptide chains, and even protein?

etc.

Many, many, many things have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. And no there isn't any reasonable doubt against the theory of evolution. The evidence supporting evolution is overwhelming, and there is absolutely no evidence to dispute it. Not even a little bit.

edit.. Actually I see the words, proven, determined, known, in scientific journals all the time. You will see it quite often in Popular Science, Discover magazine, and you will hear it used on the Discovery Science Channel all the time. It used to be called the Discovery Channel, but now it's called the Science Channel, however it's the same station.

Also hasn't forensics science and DNA testing proven many defendants to be guilty and many convicts to be innocent? When people try to say Science has never proven anything, they need to really think about that twice.

There are lots of things wrong with this post: DNA testing can only verify a match to a certain percentage. We know the earth orbits the sun because we've seen it happen...repeatedly. We know we're not the only planet in the solar system because we've physically seen the others. We have only observed microevolution...not macroevolution. While I personally believe the mechanics to be more or less the same (with the exception of sexual reproduction thrown into the mix), we simply cannot say that it's been proven...because we haven't seen it happen. We can only theorize on its mechanics and look into windows to the past, because evolution takes thousands and perhaps millions of years to occur.

By the way, just because there's been no evidence to the contrary doesn't mean that there is no reasonable doubt. Unfortunately, gaps in records (which are inevitable, a point that some creationists don't seem to be able to understand) of geologic time and fossils make evolution incredibly difficult to verify, or prove...which is why it hasn't been done.

Furthermore, Popular Science (*shudder*), Discover magazine, Discovery Science...these are NOT scientific journals. Go to a library and read. Please. I'm talking about published experiments and scientific papers, not editorials and journalism. (Jesus Tapdancing Christ, Popular Science?? Garbage. Pick up Scientific American instead, if anything...still not a scientific journal, though. ).

Yes, there are basic things that I suppose can be proven, or, "known." However, in the realm of the laboratory and theoretical mechanics, nothing is ever truly proven or known...it can only be supported, no matter how many times it's been supported in the past. Evolution, or macroevolution, falls into this category. The things you've cited have been blatantly observed in real-time. Macroevolution hasn't.

 

[Spider-Bite]

There are lots of things wrong with this post: DNA testing can only verify a match to a certain percentage. We know the earth orbits the sun because we've seen it happen...repeatedly. We know we're not the only planet in the solar system because we've physically seen the others. We have only observed microevolution...not macroevolution. While I personally believe the mechanics to be more or less the same (with the exception of sexual reproduction thrown into the mix), we simply cannot say that it's been proven...because we haven't seen it happen. We can only theorize on its mechanics and look into windows to the past, because evolution takes thousands and perhaps millions of years to occur.

By the way, just because there's been no evidence to the contrary doesn't mean that there is no reasonable doubt. Unfortunately, gaps in records (which are inevitable, a point that some creationists don't seem to be able to understand) of geologic time and fossils make evolution incredibly difficult to verify, or prove...which is why it hasn't been done.

Furthermore, Popular Science (*shudder*), Discover magazine, Discovery Science...these are NOT scientific journals. Go to a library and read. Please. I'm talking about published experiments and scientific papers, not editorials and journalism. (Jesus Tapdancing Christ, Popular Science?? Garbage. Pick up Scientific American instead, if anything...still not a scientific journal, though. ).

Yes, there are basic things that I suppose can be proven, or, "known." However, in the realm of the laboratory and theoretical mechanics, nothing is ever truly proven or known...it can only be supported, no matter how many times it's been supported in the past. Evolution, or macroevolution, falls into this category. The things you've cited have been blatantly observed in real-time. Macroevolution hasn't.

I don't mean this in an insulting manner, but it appears as if you don't grasp what reasonable doubt means. It doesn't mean any doubt. Reasonable doubt means there is a good chance your wrong. For example when they match your DNA with a one in one million odds, to the DNA at the scene, it's unreasonable to assume it's not your DNA. With the evidence for Evolution and other theories such as continental drift and so on, no reasonable doubt has been raised against them. That's what I mean when I say proven beyond a "reasonable" doubt. Like the court system. Ocasionally innocent people are convicted, but often times the defendant's guilt has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. that doesn't mean beyond any doubt. It means beyond reasonable doubt. There is a difference.

 

[Snipershot]

freakin sweet