Evolution vs Creation-Comparing each View

[neanderpaul14]

Evolution must be correct because the Christians tell us it is.

And as we all know Christianity is never wrong about scientific matters.

I mean we all know that the Earth is flat......oooops

And the Earth is the center of the universe.......eeeeer wrong again???

Well at least they're not allowed to burn those who disagree with their silly views anymore.

[SultanOfSurreal]

Evolution must be correct because the Christians tell us it is.

And as we all know Christianity is never wrong about scientific matters.

I mean we all know that the Earth is flat......oooops

And the Earth is the center of the universe.......eeeeer wrong again???

Well at least they're not allowed to burn those who disagree with their silly views anymore.

jesus christ, are you capable of saying something that isn't mind numbingly stupid

(sources say: no)

[bedub1]

I haven't read any of this, but I already know the answer.

God created everything with evolution.

The two ideas aren't mutually exclusive, they are in fact, one and the same.

[Neoteny]

I haven't read any of this, but I already know the answer.

God created everything with evolution.

The two ideas aren't mutually exclusive, they are in fact, one and the same.

Incorrect, sir.

[jonka]

It kinda would determine on a persons interpretation of religious teachings.

[Frigidus]

It kinda would determine on a persons interpretation of religious teachings.

Apparently creationists' interpretation of religious teachings is that anyone who interprets things differently than they do is a blasphemer, and therefore aren't real Christians.

[john9blue]

Evolution and God answer two different questions. They aren't mutually exclusive. [/thread]

[Juan_Bottom]

Evolution and God answer two different questions. They aren't mutually exclusive. [/thread]

Yeah everything has a natural and scientific explaination. PROVING that there is a GOD.

[SultanOfSurreal]

Evolution and God answer two different questions. They aren't mutually exclusive. [/thread]

as a matter of fact they are exclusive. if we can explain with natural processes how humans and the world around us came to be and how things work, there is no reason to postulate the existence of a magical sky man who blinked everything into existence. clinging to that belief is the sign of an emotionally stunted idiot.

[john9blue]

Yeah everything has a natural and scientific explaination. PROVING that there is a GOD.

The Big Bang has a scientific explanation? The 90% or so of dark matter and dark energy that is missing? You can't say everything has a scientific explanation when clearly we don't have every explanation to give.

Well, you can, but that's just a belief.

as a matter of fact they are exclusive. if we can explain with natural processes how humans and the world around us came to be and how things work, there is no reason to postulate the existence of a magical sky man who blinked everything into existence. clinging to that belief is the sign of an emotionally stunted idiot.

Please share how evolution tells us "how humans and the world around us came to be and how things work". That sounds awfully general. Does evolution explain how my alarm clock works? How about my laptop? Looks like the Almighty Evolution can't answer all questions, I suppose.

[PLAYER57832]

Evolution and God answer two different questions. They aren't mutually exclusive. [/thread]

as a matter of fact they are exclusive. if we can explain with natural processes how humans and the world around us came to be and how things work, there is no reason to postulate the existence of a magical sky man who blinked everything into existence. clinging to that belief is the sign of an emotionally stunted idiot.

You might not see a reason, but unless you can prove it false, excluding the possibility makes you very narrow minded, illogical and even unscientific.

[PLAYER57832]

The Big Bang has a scientific explanation? The 90% or so of dark matter and dark energy that is missing? You can't say everything has a scientific explanation when clearly we don't have every explanation to give.

Well, you can, but that's just a belief.

The Big Bang is not part of Evolutionary theory. Evolution has to do with the diversification of species, not Earth's creation.

But I agree with you john9blue, not everything is proven.

[john9blue]

The Big Bang is not part of Evolutionary theory. Evolution has to do with the diversification of species, not Earth's creation.

But I agree with you john9blue, not everything is proven.

That's exactly my point.

These guys seem to be under the impression that evolution rules out the possibility of God...

[PLAYER57832]

I haven't read any of this, but I already know the answer.

God created everything with evolution.

The two ideas aren't mutually exclusive, they are in fact, one and the same.

Incorrect, sir.

That is the assertion of thos who wish Creationism to be true, but most Christians do accept both Evolution and Genesis as different ways of describing the same events, one scientific and one not.

[PLAYER57832]

The Big Bang is not part of Evolutionary theory. Evolution has to do with the diversification of species, not Earth's creation.

But I agree with you john9blue, not everything is proven.

That's exactly my point.

These guys seem to be under the impression that evolution rules out the possibility of God...

That is Widowmakers assertion. I believe he makes this clear ... elsewhere.

[SultanOfSurreal]

The Big Bang is not part of Evolutionary theory. Evolution has to do with the diversification of species, not Earth's creation.

But I agree with you john9blue, not everything is proven.

That's exactly my point.

These guys seem to be under the impression that evolution rules out the possibility of God...

no evolution itself does not rule out the already minute possibility of a god, though it does strike a devastating blow in it. but the whole of human scientific knowledge and the inevitable philosophical conclusions that knowledge prompts is the real reason belief in god is asinine and laughable.

You might not see a reason, but unless you can prove it false, excluding the possibility makes you very narrow minded, illogical and even unscientific.

hmm yes, never thought about that one. well i also can't prove false the proposition that you are a pedophile and serial murderer, so i'd better keep my mind open, maaaaan

[PLAYER57832]

The Big Bang is not part of Evolutionary theory. Evolution has to do with the diversification of species, not Earth's creation.

But I agree with you john9blue, not everything is proven.

That's exactly my point.

These guys seem to be under the impression that evolution rules out the possibility of God...

no evolution itself does not rule out the already minute possibility of a god, though it does strike a devastating blow in it. but the whole of human scientific knowledge and the inevitable philosophical conclusions that knowledge prompts is the real reason belief in god is asinine and laughable.

Explain how. Einstein couldn't and I would warrant he was a tad smarter than you.

You might not see a reason, but unless you can prove it false, excluding the possibility makes you very narrow minded, illogical and even unscientific.

hmm yes, never thought about that one. well i also can't prove false the proposition that you are a pedophile and serial murderer, so i'd better keep my mind open, maaaaan

Real science should teach you to look beyond the obvious and the expected.

But, no, you really don't know if I am any of those things, not really.

[SultanOfSurreal]

Try studying logic... or simply real science. It does wonders for expanding your thinking.

says the man who doesn't know that the burden of proof lies on the claimant

lollll

[PLAYER57832]

Try studying logic... or simply real science. It does wonders for expanding your thinking.

says the man who doesn't know that the burden of proof lies on the claimant

lollll

Says someone who doesn't know even the obvious about me ... never mind anything else.

And, in this case.. you are the one making the assertion of proof, not I. You see, I have studied logic, and science ... and even a bit of criminal law.

[john9blue]

says the man who doesn't know that the burden of proof lies on the claimant

lollll

I won't believe that this is true until you convince me that it is an absolutely necessary rule for logical thinking. The burden of proof is on you, sir.

[SultanOfSurreal]

Try studying logic... or simply real science. It does wonders for expanding your thinking.

says the man who doesn't know that the burden of proof lies on the claimant

lollll

Says someone who doesn't know even the obvious about me ... never mind anything else.

And, in this case.. you are the one making the assertion of proof, not I.

the proposition here is "god exists"

i consider that statement false until there is evidence for it (there is no evidence for it)

You see, I have studied logic, and science ... and even a bit of criminal law.

wow you truly are a renaissance man

however i find it hard to believe that someone with such a rigid background in epistemology would fail to grasp the most basic rules of proof. the, ahem, logical conclusion is that you are yet another idiot who only thinks he is way smart

[PLAYER57832]

If you are an open person, perhaps sign up for a class on evolution, it doesn't deny god or the majority of creationism, only one lying sentance "Everything was created the way it is and always will be.", which you probably have realized isn't true, so basicly, you can believe that God create the Heavens and the Earth, and life, and light, and people, and then certain evolutions took place, you do run into contradictions about the fossil record, but then you can realize that God created the earth knowing that it would set evolution in motion.
Thank you if you read this far, I have tried to open your eyes and spent my time that I alloted for my bio homework.

Widowmakers has not responded to this thread for some time. However, Creationists vary a bit on the fossil question.

The old assertion was that fossils were simply not created the way geologists claim. Some even went so far as to say that Satan put them here to intentionally misguide us, (though I don't believe that is a current Creationist belief)

More recently, Dr Morris/the Institute for Creation Science assert that the fossil record does not show Evolution. They claim that if Evolution were true, there would have to be many more fossils. They also claim that assertions of these varied species is just plain wrong.

They do acknowledge microevolution... small changes, but say macroevolution (one species becoming another) simply doesn't happen.

It is good to be informed of Creationist thinking nowadays, if you are interested look up the Institute for Creation research. (actually, there are 2 big centers)

[PLAYER57832]

Try studying logic... or simply real science. It does wonders for expanding your thinking.

says the man who doesn't know that the burden of proof lies on the claimant

lollll

Says someone who doesn't know even the obvious about me ... never mind anything else.

And, in this case.. you are the one making the assertion of proof, not I.

the proposition here is "god exists"

i consider that statement false until there is evidence for it (there is no evidence for it)

You have it backwards. We are not claiming we can prove God exists. You assert there is proof he does not. It is you who needs to provide the proof. We simply say it is a matter of belief.

You see, I have studied logic, and science ... and even a bit of criminal law.

wow you truly are a renaissance man

however i find it hard to believe that someone with such a rigid background in epistemology would fail to grasp the most basic rules of proof. the, ahem, logical conclusion is that you are yet another idiot who only thinks he is way smart

(laughing for multiple reasons, but mostly not the ones you think...)
OK, finally managed to stop laughing enough to respond..... actually, just reread the above. Oh, and think about what I really said, not just what you are trying to put forward.

[MaleAlphaThree]

Hay guise dohn't u thnk its convenient hao peeple alwayz interpret whatev thay wahnt frum tha byble an than say intelligent things lyke evolution wer parte of gawds plahn? Ie finde et convenient.

[Neoteny]

If this thread were snow, I pissed my name in it about halfway back.