GM organisms does not depend upon evolution! GM organisms depends upon human scientists altering our Creator-God designed genomes for their own financial benefits!
But that's a form of evolution, and you know it. You can't convince anyone otherwise. You can't hand out your own definition of it and expect others to agree. You are simply wrong.
There are three sides to every story: your side, my side, and the truth.
God is just a personification of reality, of pure objectivity.
iama: There is no EXPERIMENT which has confirmed / evidenced what evolution "theory" claims!
amcolph: What hogwash. Not only are there innumerable experiments, there is a multi-billion dollar ag genetics industry which depends on the theory of evolution being correct.
iama: That is false! The ToE has nothing whatsoever to do with the multi-billion dollar ag genetics industry! Their industry depends upon their great desire for money, and their lack of concern for human beings, animals and crops!
amcolph: It doesn't matter what you think of agricultural genetics, most of which doesn't involve the kind of gene modification you are talking about.
It doesn't matter whether you think it is right or wrong. If they used the YEC theory of genetics it wouldn't work and they wouldn't be able to make their millions of dollars.
iama: Your support of a despicable motivation for the GM-industry is telling!
amcolph: The Soviet Union proved it. When they outlawed the theory of evolution soviet agriculture collapsed and millions starved.
iama: Is this what you are referring to? What is meant by the "modern genetics" mentioned in the article?
"In rejecting the advancements of modern genetics, the influence of Lysenko and Lysenkoism adversely affected many areas of science, especially research in agricultural genetics. Although historical scholars debate the extent of the blame Lysenkoism deserves for decreased agricultural production, increased famine, and other deprivations for Soviet citizens, Lysenkoism retarded the advancement of modern genetics and resulted in the repression and persecution of Soviet scientists."
It was Lenin's choices which hurt Soviet Union agriculture!
amcolph: The same is true of geology.
Real working geologists, the kind who have to actually find minerals or oil under the Earth to get paid, never use flood geology in their work.
Why?
Because it doesn't describe or predict anything real. It won't show them where the minerals are and they wouldn't get paid.
iama: Geologists working at discovering minerals underground use seismic results and their knowledge based upon experience!
Preoccupation with money in the pocket over integrity of spirit-heart, explains a lot!
"Monsanto's herbicidal chemical glyphosate could cause infertility or cancer. It may also be speeding the growth of super weeds and causing worrying changes to plants and soil.
The chemical, which has long been touted as a safe part of global food production, is now at a crossroads. Regulators in the United States and Canada are conducting a formal review of glyphosate's safety, even as lawsuits are pending and some groups are calling for a global ban.
According to Reuters:
"Environmentalists, consumer groups and plant scientists from several countries are warning that heavy use of the chemical over the years is causing dangerous problems for plants, people and animals alike."
Monsanto is also only an FDA approval away from its latest monstrosity -- soybeans that have been genetically modified to produce omega-3 fats. That FDA approval is expected this year.
Monsanto plans to include GM soybean oil in every product it can -- baked goods, baking mixes, breakfast cereals, cheeses, frozen dairy desserts, pasta, gravies and sauces, fruit juices, snack foods, candy, soups, and more.
According to Forbes:
"Monsanto is so despised by environmentalists that Google's first suggested search term for the St. Louis company is 'Monsanto evil.' Readers ... voted Monsanto the world's most evil corporation in a January poll, giving the corporation a whopping 51 percent of the vote."
Marie-Monique Robin, author of The World According To Monsanto, says that for all Monsanto's talk about the ecological and humanitarian benefits of its chemicals and genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the solutions have never been delivered.
According to Robin's extensive documentation, this is because what really matters to Monsanto is control of the world seed market. To that end, they have genetically engineered seeds that are resistant to, and therefore dependent on, Roundup, Monsanto's herbicide, which nets them gigantic profits.
Green Left reports:
"GMOs and Roundup, says Robin, are amongst the 'most dangerous products of modern times', joining a list that is heavily populated by other Monsanto products such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dioxin and bovine growth hormones.
In all cases, Monsanto has been fully aware of their harmfulness yet has lied about their dangers with an impunity conferred by the collusion between the company and the public health and environmental authorities of successive U.S. governments."
You can click on the Green Left link below to read the full story of Monsanto's criminal history."
.
The wonder of Christmas is that the God Who dwelt among us, now, can dwell within us. - Roy Lessin . "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do." . Justice is receiving what you deserve. Mercy is NOT receiving what you deserve. Grace is receiving what you DO NOT deserve. .
LeahOne: We have been altering GOD's creation of food since we fermented the first fruits or grains, and since we ground the first flour - as well as since we started cooking our meat.
Not to mention since we started controlled breeding of animals and plants. Modern GM is just a much more efficient means of making the changes we want.
iama: Is there any relationship to where Monsanto GM corn is being grown, and the crop failures being experienced, currently, in 2012?
The wonder of Christmas is that the God Who dwelt among us, now, can dwell within us. - Roy Lessin . "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do." . Justice is receiving what you deserve. Mercy is NOT receiving what you deserve. Grace is receiving what you DO NOT deserve. .
iama: Your support of a despicablecollection of bronze age, goat herder fairy tales is telling!
You know, the one that says that women can't speak in church, the one that says that disobedient children should be killed, the one that says that it's okay to offer your young virgin daughters up to groups of men to be raped, the one that says owning slaves (and killing them) is acceptable.
BTW the chances that a woman you know has had an affair are extremenly high. A friend, cousin, sister, mother. Why didn't you stone her to death? Your holy book says that you are supposed to.
"creationism" ... 2000+ years worth of ABYSMAL FAILURE ... and proud of it.
iama: This article advocates for a "classical science" education. Doing so, it goes back to a time when NATURAL SCIENCES were treated the same:
Sigmund: You claimed that "the definition of what a "theory," itself is, needed to be changed to accommodate a speculation."
iama: This article advocates for a "classical science" education. Doing so, it goes back to a time when NATURAL SCIENCES were treated the same:
Sigmund: You claimed that "the definition of what a "theory," itself is, needed to be changed to accommodate a speculation."
This should be a very simple question for you to answer. Break it up this way:
Sigmund: What was the ORIGINAL MEANING of the word "theory" (used in it's scientific sense):
iama: Observations and experiments have tested hypotheses and a theory is devised based upon facts.
Sigmund: WHY that definition does not include evolution:
iama: The evolution could not be tested by facts derived from observations and experiments.
Sigmund: HOW the definition was changed to include evolution:
iama: Evolution, abstract thinking and reasonable explanations or assumptions put forward to explain natural phenomenon.
Sigmund: Any EVIDENCE that the ONLY reason the definition was changed was to include evolution:
Iama: There are two types of biological fields, OPERATIONAL BIOLOGY, and HISTORICAL BIOLOGY, and it is the evolution theories which have been changed, because of the historical nature of the theory.
----------
iama: (Not in my own words:)
Sigmund: What was the ORIGINAL MEANING of the word "theory" (used in it's scientific sense):
iama: 5) A scheme or system of ideas or statements held as an explanation or account of a group of facts or phenomena; a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment, and is propounded or accepted as accounting for the known facts; a statement of what are held to be the general laws, principles or causes of something known or observed. (Oxford English Dictionary, 1961; [emphasis added]).
Sigmund: WHY that definition does not include evolution:
iama: “The changes in biology were, if anything, even more drastic (Mayr 1985). Physiology lost its position as the exclusive paradigm of biology in 1859 when Darwin established evolutionary biology. When behavioral biology, ecology, population biology, and other branches of modern biology developed, it became even more evident how unsuitable mechanics was as a paradigm of biological science.”
Sigmund: HOW the definition was changed to include evolution:
iama: “1. The abstract principles of a science as distinguished from basic or applied science. 2. A reasonable explanation or assumption advanced to explain a natural phenomenon but lacking confirming proof (Steen, 1971). [NB: author stated: I don't like this one but I include it to show you that even in "Science dictionaries" there is variation in definitions which leads to confusion].”
Sigmund: Any EVIDENCE that the ONLY reason the definition was changed was to include evolution:
Iama: There are two types of biological fields, as described, above, and it is the evolution theories which have been changed, because of the historical nature of the theory.
----------
Iama: Here are my research results related to the above:
Sibmund: Please demonstrate the
ORIGINAL MEANING of the word theory (used in the scientific sense),
iama: “The word has been in use in English since at least the late 16th century.[6] Modern uses of the word "theory" are derived from the original definition, but have taken on new shades of meaning, still based on the idea that a theory is a thoughtful and rational explanation of the general nature of things.” - wiki
iama: The earliest definition given in this list is #5.
THEORY
1) The grandest synthesis of a large and important body of information about some related group of natural phenomena (Moore, 1984)
2) A body of knowledge and explanatory concepts that seek to increase our understanding ("explain") a major phenomenon of nature (Moore, 1984).
3) A scientifically accepted general principle supported by a substantial body of evidence offered to provide an explanation of observed facts and as a basis for future discussion or investigation (Lincoln et al., 1990).
4) 1. The abstract principles of a science as distinguished from basic or applied science. 2. A reasonable explanation or assumption advanced to explain a natural phenomenon but lacking confirming proof (Steen, 1971). [NB: author stated: I don't like this one but I include it to show you that even in "Science dictionaries" there is variation in definitions which leads to confusion].
5) A scheme or system of ideas or statements held as an explanation or account of a group of facts or phenomena; a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment, and is propounded or accepted as accounting for the known facts; a statement of what are held to be the general laws, principles or causes of something known or observed. (Oxford English Dictionary, 1961; [emphasis added]).
6) An explanation for an observation or series of observations that is substantiated by a considerable body of evidence (Krimsley, 1995).
A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of reality. In the scientific method theory is formed following the testing of a hypothesis and incorporates substantial facts and scientific law presupposing logic. Theory frequently exists as a belief or as a concept that can guide behavior, or an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena. - Answers.com
iama: I dug out some old textbooks:
CHEMISTRY
1949 – Chemistry and You –
Hypothesis: (chemical) A plausible explanation, becomes known as a hypothesis which is merely a tentative explanation to account for some observed facts. - subject to change
Theory: (chemical) A general principle offered to explain certain phenomena.
Theory: (chemical) If further investigation shows that a hypothesis agrees with all known facts, it may be “promoted to a higher rating” as a theory. - subject to change – A theory is an attempt to interpret the “mechanics” of nature's actions.
Scientific Law: If a theory is conclusively proved to be true, it becomes a scientific law. A law of science is a general statement of truth about nature's unvarying actions. A scientific law describes how nature DOES act under certain conditions.
- 1947, 1954 - Chemistry for Our Times -
Scientific Method
- 1. Collection of facts
- 2. Organize facts
- 3. State the Law – Law: A scientific law is a statement describing a general truth that becomes clear by a study of the organized facts. The law describes (in sentence form) the facts as known at the time. - subject to change
- 4. Explain the Law as a Theory – The purpose of Theory is to explain a Law. A theory helps a scientist in the same way that a plan or blue-print helps a builder. The plan tells how the building materials are to be put together so that a useful building is formed. The Theory is an attempt to tell how maerials can behave the way the law shows that they do, or what the underlying cause of the law is.
- 5. Prediction of new Facts from the Theory. If the theory is a good one, it will suggest new experiments to be tried. As a result, new facts may be discovered that were never thought of before. In science, keen minds study the theory, and new experimentsa are planned.
- 6. Test of the Theory. Are the new Facts found to be as predicted, or are different facts discovered? If the predictions are true, the theory is strengthened. If not, the theory needs repair. Theories can change.
To scientists, a theory is a coherent explanation for a large number of facts and observations about the natural world.
A theory is:
Internally consistent and compatible with the evidence
Firmly grounded in and based upon evidence
Tested against a wide range of phenomena
Demonstrably effective in problem-solving
In popular use, a theory is often assumed to imply mere speculation, but in science, something is not called a theory until it has been confirmed over many independent experiments. Theories are more certain than hypotheses, but less certain than laws. The procedures and processes for testing a theory are well-defined within each scientific discipline.
Example: Between 1856 and 1863 Mendel cultivated and tested some 28,000 pea plants which brought forth two theories of how character traits are inherited. Ironically, when Mendel's paper was published on 1866, it had little impact. It wasn't until the early 20th century that the enormity of his ideas was realized.”
“In modern science, the term "theory" refers to scientific theories, a well-confirmed type of explanation of nature, made in a way consistent with scientific method, and fulfilling the criteria required by modern science. Such theories are described in such a way that any scientist in the field is in a position to understand and either provide empirical support ("verify") or empirically contradict ("falsify") it. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge,[2]”- wiki
Sigmund: WHY that definition did not include evolution,
iama: Originally, the same definition of theory was used for all fields of science. Following is a statement of why the definition for a biology theory has changed:
“The changes in biology were, if anything, even more drastic (Mayr 1985). Physiology lost its position as the exclusive paradigm of biology in 1859 when Darwin established evolutionary biology. When behavioral biology, ecology, population biology, and other branches of modern biology developed, it became even more evident how unsuitable mechanics was as a paradigm of biological science.”
“Comparative Versus Experimental Method
The experiment has traditionally been the primary means of investigation in the physical sciences and some philosophers have claimed that it is the only legitimate method of science. In fact, since the days of Copernicus and Kepler, observation and comparison have been exceedingly successful methods in such physical sciences as astronomy, geology, oceanography, and meteorology. And in biology, where observation and comparison have always been of paramount importance, experimental methods have been incorporated into the methodological repertory of many originally observational disciplines, including ecology and ethology.
The roles of the experimental and comparative methods in biology can be understood only if one realizes that biology actually consists of two rather different major fields of study. The firstis the biology of proximate causations (broadly, functional biology), and the secondis the biology of ultimate causations.”
Sigmund: HOW the definition was changed to include evolution, and
iama: As you can read, above, there are two different major fields of biology study.
1. The functional biology which is tested the other science fields and has the traditional type of theories
2. The biology which is evoluton, which does not have the traditional type of theories.
Sigmund: PROVIDE EVIDENCE that the ONLY reason the definition was changed was to include evolution.
Iama: There are two types of biological fields, as described, above, OPERATIONAL BIOLOGY, and HISTORICAL BIOLOGY, and it is the evolution (historical) theories which have been changed, because of the historical nature of the theory.
.
The wonder of Christmas is that the God Who dwelt among us, now, can dwell within us. - Roy Lessin . "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do." . Justice is receiving what you deserve. Mercy is NOT receiving what you deserve. Grace is receiving what you DO NOT deserve. .
iama: well, you finally got around to providing some kind of what you think is support for your claim that, "the definition of what a "theory," itself is, needed to be changed to accommodate a speculation."
Unfortunately, none of the definitions of a scientific theory you have posted here are incompatible with the theory of evolution and none of them have been changed to make them agree with evolution.
Iama: There are two types of biological fields, OPERATIONAL BIOLOGY, and HISTORICAL BIOLOGY, and it is the evolution theories which have been changed, because of the historical nature of the theory.
The only people who accept this are the YECs who made up this distinction. Real scientists do not recognize it because there is no difference between the two. I bet even Dr. Wood doesn't agree with it.
iama: 5) A scheme or system of ideas or statements held as an explanation or account of a group of facts or phenomena; a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment, and is propounded or accepted as accounting for the known facts; a statement of what are held to be the general laws, principles or causes of something known or observed. (Oxford English Dictionary, 1961; [emphasis added]).
This is completely compatible with the theory of evolution.
iama: “1. The abstract principles of a science as distinguished from basic or applied science. 2. A reasonable explanation or assumption advanced to explain a natural phenomenon but lacking confirming proof (Steen, 1971). [NB: author stated: I don't like this one but I include it to show you that even in "Science dictionaries" there is variation in definitions which leads to confusion].”
Just because someone states what they think is the definition of theory does not mean they are correct. Considering that you have earlier definitions of theory in your response (above, in bold red, from 1961, and below, from Chemistry in 1947/49) that contradict this definition, I don't know why you think this helps your claim. The fact that a Professor of Biology (Dr. Ronald H. Matson Ph.D., Associate Vice President for Faculty & Professor of Biology at Kennesaw State University) doesn't like that definition should tell you something, but you probably don't understand what.
The word has been in use in English since at least the late 16th century.[6] Modern uses of the word "theory" are derived from the original definition, but have taken on new shades of meaning, still based on the idea that a theory is a thoughtful and rational explanation of the general nature of things.” - wiki
Why is this a problem? It is not the defnition of scientific theory. However, a scientific theory is still "a thoughtful and rational explanation of the general nature of things" but there is more to it than that.
A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of reality. In the scientific method theory is formed following the testing of a hypothesis and incorporates substantial facts and scientific law presupposing logic. Theory frequently exists as a belief or as a concept that can guide behavior, or an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena. - Answers.com
Correct. And from a creationist website. Again, how does this help your claim?
Hypothesis: (chemical) A plausible explanation, becomes known as a hypothesis which is merely a tentative explanation to account for some observed facts. - subject to change
Theory: (chemical) A general principle offered to explain certain phenomena.
Theory: (chemical) If further investigation shows that a hypothesis agrees with all known facts, it may be “promoted to a higher rating” as a theory. - subject to change – A theory is an attempt to interpret the “mechanics” of nature's actions.
Scientific Law: If a theory is conclusively proved to be true, it becomes a scientific law. A law of science is a general statement of truth about nature's unvarying actions. A scientific law describes how nature DOES act under certain conditions.
- 1947, 1954 - Chemistry for Our Times -
Scientific Method
- 1. Collection of facts
- 2. Organize facts
- 3. State the Law – Law: A scientific law is a statement describing a general truth that becomes clear by a study of the organized facts. The law describes (in sentence form) the facts as known at the time. - subject to change
- 4. Explain the Law as a Theory – The purpose of Theory is to explain a Law. A theory helps a scientist in the same way that a plan or blue-print helps a builder. The plan tells how the building materials are to be put together so that a useful building is formed. The Theory is an attempt to tell how materials can behave the way the law shows that they do, or what the underlying cause of the law is.
- 5. Prediction of new Facts from the Theory. If the theory is a good one, it will suggest new experiments to be tried. As a result, new facts may be discovered that were never thought of before. In science, keen minds study the theory, and new experiments are planned.
- 6. Test of the Theory. Are the new Facts found to be as predicted, or are different facts discovered? If the predictions are true, the theory is strengthened. If not, the theory needs repair. Theories can change.
All completely compatible with the theory of evolution. And from 1947-49. Kind of shoots your claim that the defnition of "Theory" has changed to accomodate evolution in the foot though.
It also highlights the possibility that Steen in his 1971 edition of "Dictionary of Biology" (that you referenced earlier) may not have gotten the definition quite right as it was understood at the time. I wonder if his defnition was changed in the 1973 edition. Anyone have a copy?
I don't know that there is a "Law" of evolution though. The closest thing to a "law of evolution" is the fact that organisms change over time. Someone feel free to correct me on that if I am misunderstanding it though.
To scientists, a theory is a coherent explanation for a large number of facts and observations about the natural world.
A theory is:
Internally consistent and compatible with the evidence
Firmly grounded in and based upon evidence
Tested against a wide range of phenomena
Demonstrably effective in problem-solving
In popular use, a theory is often assumed to imply mere speculation, but in science, something is not called a theory until it has been confirmed over many independent experiments. Theories are more certain than hypotheses, but less certain than laws. The procedures and processes for testing a theory are well-defined within each scientific discipline.
Example: Between 1856 and 1863 Mendel cultivated and tested some 28,000 pea plants which brought forth two theories of how character traits are inherited. Ironically, when Mendel's paper was published on 1866, it had little impact. It wasn't until the early 20th century that the enormity of his ideas was realized.”
“In modern science, the term "theory" refers to scientific theories, a well-confirmed type of explanation of nature, made in a way consistent with scientific method, and fulfilling the criteria required by modern science. Such theories are described in such a way that any scientist in the field is in a position to understand and either provide empirical support ("verify") or empirically contradict ("falsify") it. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge,[2]”- wiki
Everything above is completely compatible with the theory of evolution.
“The changes in biology were, if anything, even more drastic (Mayr 1985). Physiology lost its position as the exclusive paradigm of biology in 1859 when Darwin established evolutionary biology. When behavioral biology, ecology, population biology, and other branches of modern biology developed, it became even more evident how unsuitable mechanics was as a paradigm of biological science.”
“Comparative Versus Experimental Method
The experiment has traditionally been the primary means of investigation in the physical sciences and some philosophers have claimed that it is the only legitimate method of science. In fact, since the days of Copernicus and Kepler, observation and comparison have been exceedingly successful methods in such physical sciences as astronomy, geology, oceanography, and meteorology. And in biology, where observation and comparison have always been of paramount importance, experimental methods have been incorporated into the methodological repertory of many originally observational disciplines, including ecology and ethology.
The roles of the experimental and comparative methods in biology can be understood only if one realizes that biology actually consists of two rather different major fields of study. The firstis the biology of proximate causations (broadly, functional biology), and the secondis the biology of ultimate causations.”
What book is this from? The link you give goes to the Google Books home page.
Iama: There are two types of biological fields, as described, above, OPERATIONAL BIOLOGY, and HISTORICAL BIOLOGY, and it is the evolution (historical) theories which have been changed, because of the historical nature of the theory. [emphasis mine]
Again, the only people that accept this distinction are the YECs who made it up in the first place.
As to the part in bold, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU that theory of evolution has changed, although not with your reasoning as to why. ALL scientific theories change as new evidence becomes available. If they cannot change to fit the evidence, then they are discarded. This is why YEC "creation science" will NEVER be a scientific theory. It CANNOT, and WILL NOT, be changed to fit new evidence.
I will accept your response to the first question (shown below). I await your response to the three other simple questions. They should not require multiple links, as all I am looking for is your own words.
1. What was the ORIGINAL MEANING of the word "theory" (used in it's scientific sense):
iama: Observations and experiments have tested hypotheses and a theory is devised based upon facts. (somewhat simplistic but basically correct. ETA: Also basically what the definition is today. How it has changed from this should be an interesting answer to read)
2. WHY that definition does not include evolution (your belief that there are no facts or successful experiments for evolution is not sufficient to answer this question):
(YOUR ANSWER HERE, one or two sentences should do it)
3. HOW the definition was changed to include evolution:
(YOUR ANSWER HERE, one or two sentences should do it)
4. Any EVIDENCE that the ONLY reason the definition was changed was to include evolution:
(YOUR ANSWER HERE, one or two sentences should do it)
For My Mother: In Praise of a Life Lived
Chasing an Elusive God
Why Christianity Is Dying But Spirituality Is Thriving?
On the Frontlines An interview with Yael Eckstein, Senior Vice President of the ...
Ray Liotta, Seth Green Join an All-Star Cast in Indie Film ‘The Identical’ “We want to bring films with a redeeming value to the world. One of ...
A Life of Hope The fact that you’re standing here today with breath in your lungs ...
Habits for a Heart Healthy Lifestyle Heart disease is a top killer worldwide -- but our lifestyle choices ...
Emotional Equations Using brilliantly simple math that illuminates universal emotional ...
Are You a Compulsive or Binge Eater? Do you struggle with your weight? Find out more about compulsive and ...
Faith, Freedom and Rocker John Schlitt “We are making choices on greed and stupidity. The truth is that our ...
Robert Griffin III: Not the Average Rookie Washington Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III continues to wow ...
Green Powders to Add to Your Diet Now Green powders are a great way to boost your health, keep your energy ...
Natural Deodorants That Actually Work What's that smell? Not us! We’ve been on a mission to find the best ...
Birth of a Habit How long does it take to form a new habit? How long should it take ...
Madly In Love With ME “I will never settle for less than my heart and soul desire.”
Is It Love If You're All Cranky When You Give It? Love is the answer to everything in life.
Living A Meaningful Life You are what you love and you love whatever you give your attention ...
"The Bible" a Labor of Love for Famed Producer, Wife The five-week, 10-hour TV special was nurtured by "Touched by an ...
Who Should Be Allowed to Pray for President Obama? It seems preposterous, but there’s a major debate over who is worthy ...
