Evolution v. Creationism

[Korashk]

I haven't seen a topic on this in a while, and saw a few people in other topics expressing that they don't believe evolution happens. By 'creationist' I'm referring to Biblical Literalists, YEC, etc. not people who believe in evolution but think a god was the originator of life. First things first, clearing up misconceptions time:

- A theory in science does not mean the same thing as it does in a colloquial sense. When your average person says "I have a theory", what they usually mean is "I have a hypothesis". A theory in science is serves to explain OBSERVABLE phenomena. We see it happen, draw up a hypothesis to explain how it happens, and when that hypothesis is proven true it's a theory. Also, as far as science is concerned, theory is as high as it gets. Theories aren't "upgraded" to laws once more and more evidence is gained. Scientific laws and scientific theories aren't really related at all.

- Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life. Period. That's a question for physics.

- There is no such thing as macro- or micro- evolution. They're the same thing. Those distinctions were popularized by creationists who wanted to look less dumb because we can watch species adapt (which is what they call microevolution).

- The argument "We haven't seen a species change into another species" is bullshit. Yes we have, numerous (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html) times. (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html)

- All fossils are transitional fossils.

- Carbon-14 dating is unreliable when determining the age of things over 60,000 years old. Which is why scientists don't use it to date dinosaur fossils.

- Evolutionary scientists don't claim that people evolved from monkeys. They claim that monkeys and humans share a common ancestor.

So now it's questions time. For those that don't think evolution happens, why not? Do you have a reasonable explanation?

[RoseyCadaver]

I know it's for people who don't believe in evolution,but I have something to say to them ^^.

I know evolution is considered a theory,but I more or less think it's a fact.I mean you can't disprove it really,look at all the fossils.Things didn't exist one million years ago did not just start popping out of the sky.Things are constantly evolving.Even man is,in a way,causing a form of evolution to happen(look at hybrid plants,they changed,and a lot are starting to appear in the wild,aren't they,even if it is caused by us?).

[Sage]

I know evolution is considered a theory,but I more or less think it's a fact.

I don't think you understand what a scientific theory is.

[RoseyCadaver]

I don't think you understand what a scientific theory is.

I understand,but a lot of people I do know still think as theory with hypothesis,I didn't know if many people here are like that or not.

[Genghis Khan]

I don't think you understand what a scientific theory is.

Where's the fallacy in what he pointed out?

[Sage]

Where's the fallacy in what he pointed out?

He implied scientific theories and facts are two separate things. Scientific theories are based on factual observations. They already are facts.

[RoseyCadaver]

He implied scientific theories and facts are two separate things. Scientific theories are based on factual observations. They already are facts.

Well ,as long as the science community sees it as a fact,I don't have a need to debate,and I think you're on the same boat about evolution,that is I think...

[Magus]

- Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life. Period. That's a question for physics.True and False. Evolution is correlated to Abiogenesis(Origin of life), and Abiogenesis is a precursor to Evolution. They are not mutually exclusive; one cannot be without the other. They are both in the same field, Biology.

- There is no such thing as macro- or micro- evolution. They're the same thing. Those distinctions were popularized by creationists who wanted to look less dumb because we can watch species adapt (which is what they call microevolution).False. Actually, there is Macroevolution.

Macroevolution is the evolution of organism in a grand scale and occurs in higher taxa. And, it is the collection of microevolution.

Microevolution is the evolution of organism is a minor scale and occurs in species and sub-species. Which is we all can actually observe.

And [-]most theist[/-] some creationist agree in Microevolution than in Macroevolution.

- Evolutionary scientists don't claim that people evolved from monkeys. They claim that monkeys and humans share a common ancestor.
APES! U negga, APES! As a Homo Sandnegerus, I am ashamed at your 'Homo Europeus' intellect.
I know evolution is considered a theoryYou are more like other theist(or, are you?), don't know what a Scientific Theory is.

[RoseyCadaver]

You are more like other theist(or, are you?), don't know what a Scientific Theory is.

I know what it is.It's an observation with data and blah blah blah.

"As used in science, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.

Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. A clear distinction needs to be made between facts (things which can be observed and/or measured) and theories (explanations which correlate and interpret the facts."

If you read above you will know that I said most people where I live think of scientific theory with the theory,as it is just a theory.I said I didn't know if people here were like that or not.I know it is pretty much a fact.I'm agnostic,so idk if that counts with theist or not xD!

Can't you damn people be happy that I'm on the evolution boat xD!

[aussiebunnie]

Could it be possible that God designed the World so that we could evolve into human beings, therefore meaning both theories are true?

[Magus]

I know what it is.It's an observation with data and blah blah blah.Well done.

Can't you damn people be happy that I'm on the evolution boat xD!
No, I want you to be on the epistemological boat.

Could it be possible that God designed the World so that we could evolve into human beings, therefore meaning both theories are true?Probable, but lacks evidence. There is nothing out there that suggest it was made by a supernatural sentient being.

[Genghis Khan]

He implied scientific theories and facts are two separate things. Scientific theories are based on factual observations. They already are facts.

Oh right. It's a shame there's so much debate over THIS particular scientific theory because of religion -_-

They even have creationist schools in America teaching kids it's wrong because it goes against God's word.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IguW9xHd2qo

[Magus]

They even have creationist schools in America teaching kids it's wrong because it goes against God's word.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IguW9xHd2qo

I laughed at those kids. Especially that last guy. How African American what? And, I can't believe we are from Apes? That's what science tries to answer. God, I hate such relijEz beebole - they are really, really dumb(because of inbreeding, obviously).

Listen my dear. You, the white kid, has evolved from the African dood.

Yes, you are not a pure race, you have the weakest degenerated genetic lines, you are not superior. U understand?

Scientifically, these doods are superior:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8ck8X77Vz5s/TZ9Aji1GBCI/AAAAAAAAAB0/KotyT5V3ENs/s1600/teeth.jpg

[Genghis Khan]

Scientifically, these doods are superior:
image (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8ck8X77Vz5s/TZ9Aji1GBCI/AAAAAAAAAB0/KotyT5V3ENs/s1600/teeth.jpg)

The average parent of those children:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_72jSAvZL5y4/TIIKm473DYI/AAAAAAAABdI/affGwO6jBPo/s1600/son_derp.jpg

Could it be possible that God designed the World so that we could evolve into human beings, therefore meaning both theories are true?

If God created everything else so perfectly then why did he specifically leave US to 'evolve' into what we are.

Edit(Thor): Don't double post, instead, use the 'Edit' button next time.

[RoseyCadaver]

No, I want you to be on the epistemological boat.

.

Rofl,you must not know me that well,or do you :P?

I study a lot of science and philosophy related subjects,I'm just happy with the evolutionary stance right now.I know it is fact,but when you live under in the good ol' bible belt like me,it's pretty to get people around you to listen to you.

[Continuum]

If God created everything else so perfectly then why did he specifically leave US to 'evolve' into what we are.


God has a sick sense of humor. Just look at how He shaped us in His image and didn't even have the nerve to make us all Gods. :P

[RoseyCadaver]

They even have creationist schools in America teaching kids it's wrong because it goes against God's word.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IguW9xHd2qo
:crazy:
Omg I just watched this video,it makes me ashamed that I have a southern accent xD!

That was really sad,I mean seriously?!?!?It don't make any seense.How could an African American person evolve from a white person?I mean he has different skeeen.


Sigh,


Gud Bluss Amerika.

[huginnmuninn]

this doesn't really have anything to do with the thread but why do people accept some theories as fact (gravity) and disregard other theories as mere speculation (evolution)?

[Continuum]

That was really sad,I mean seriously?!?!?It don't make any seense.How could an African American person evolve from a white person?I mean he has different skeeen.

Tanning booths. :P

this doesn't really have anything to do with the thread but why do people accept some theories as fact (gravity) and disregard other theories as mere speculation (evolution)?

That lies in the question of faith. Nobody antagonized Gravity when it was popularized because it didn't have any incompatibilities with Religious dogma. Some people do not want to accept anything that jeopardizes the whole foundation of what they unwittingly believe in.

[Genghis Khan]

this doesn't really have anything to do with the thread but why do people accept some theories as fact (gravity) and disregard other theories as mere speculation (evolution)?

Gravity doesn't go against faith or people's religious beliefs. Evolution does because Christians and Muslims believe God made us in his image, nawt dat w3 all ev0lv3d fram dem smely ol' monkeys. Although the original Islamic system never really had a problem with evolution or the big bang, it's recent creationist Muslims that are insisting science is wrong and their 4th Century scriptures rule us all.

[Jawbreaker]

Could it be possible that God designed the World so that we could evolve into human beings, therefore meaning both theories are true?

Yes, but it's irrelevant on many levels. For example, it is also possible that pressed a button and evolution began to occur and we wouldn't be the wiser. Point being, just because something is [I]possible it doesn't mean it's plausible given the evidence.

The biggest problem with this theory (colloquial) is that it pretty much just tacks on "God" to any available spot, regardless of what that accomplishes or what that does. It doesn't make much sense to do so other than try and squirrel in unjustified beliefs by the very lack of predictive power and unverifiability of the claim made.

I'd just be wary about adding in things like God for no logically justified reason.

[aussiebunnie]

Yes, but it's irrelevant on many levels. For example, it is also possible that pressed a button and evolution began to occur and we wouldn't be the wiser. Point being, just because something is [I]possible it doesn't mean it's plausible given the evidence.

The biggest problem with this theory (colloquial) is that it pretty much just tacks on "God" to any available spot, regardless of what that accomplishes or what that does. It doesn't make much sense to do so other than try and squirrel in unjustified beliefs by the very lack of predictive power and unverifiability of the claim made.

I'd just be wary about adding in things like God for no logically justified reason.

No I disagree, just because something is possible (which means that you cannot prove that it is impossible) does not mean that it is not plausible.

And you cannot ever prove what God intended. Therefore everything is theory. Great philosophers over time appreciate this. In fact, Socrates said that to seek the truth, you must admit you know absolutely nothing.

[RoseyCadaver]

And you cannot ever prove what God intended. Therefore everything is theory.
Not scientific theory,because then it'll be fact :D.

[Korashk]

No I disagree, just because something is possible (which means that you cannot prove that it is impossible) does not mean that it is not plausible.
Everything plausible is possible, very few possible things (as a percentage) are plausible. Just my take, but I'd only consider a thing to be in the realm of plausibility if there's evidence supporting its truth.

And you cannot ever prove what God intended. Therefore everything is theory.
T_T

I explained what 'theory' means in the OP. If it's a theory, that means it happens. Something literally can not be classified as theory in an official sense unless there it is in fact proven to happen.

[Jawbreaker]

No I disagree, just because something is possible (which means that you cannot prove that it is impossible) does not mean that it is not plausible.

And you cannot ever prove what God intended. Therefore everything is theory. Great philosophers over time appreciate this. In fact, Socrates said that to seek the truth, you must admit you know absolutely nothing.

Well see, you're trying to prove God in the first place, so it makes no sense whatsoever to say that we can never know what God intended, and then, somehow, tacking on God to an explanation is any better. Actually, this lack of predictive power, verifiability and giving us ANY insight into why things are the way they are make God a poor explanation. An explanation not only explains why things are the way they are, but also why they aren't some other way (or why the other ways are least likely). Saying that we can't know how God would act makes any claim about God based on the nature of the universe useless since we have no idea whether or not God would do something like that. It's like--and forgive the imagery--castrating your own argument to make God this super-vague thing that tells us nothing about the world. Oh, and you have to give us good reasons to think something is plausible. For all I know, it's possible that you're Osama bin Laden's ghost trying to deceive me into supporting terrorism. Whatever, I have no reason to think that is even plausible.

PS: wouldn't you know that you know absolutely nothing?

[aussiebunnie]

Well see, you're trying to prove God in the first place, so it makes no sense whatsoever to say that we can never know what God intended, and then, somehow, tacking on God to an explanation is any better. Actually, this lack of predictive power, verifiability and giving us ANY insight into why things are the way they are make God a poor explanation. An explanation not only explains why things are the way they are, but also why they aren't some other way (or why the other ways are least likely). Saying that we can't know how God would act makes any claim about God based on the nature of the universe useless since we have no idea whether or not God would do something like that. It's like--and forgive the imagery--castrating your own argument to make God this super-vague thing that tells us nothing about the world. Oh, and you have to give us good reasons to think something is plausible. For all I know, it's possible that you're Osama bin Laden's ghost trying to deceive me into supporting terrorism. Whatever, I have no reason to think that is even plausible.

PS: wouldn't you know that you know absolutely nothing?

Yes I do not know anything. I do not know if God exists or not, and I do not know if we were created from monkeys or if we evolved from a single cell that was deposited on earth on an asteroid. And I did not try to prove God exists, where did I say that?

Regarding your Osama example, that example is really irrelevant to what I said.

I asked "is it possible" in my first postulation that can both theories co-exist with each other, to which you replied "yes". I really did not care about your explanation only the fact that you thought it would be possible. And since it is possible (according to you), then there is always doubt in any theory you support.

[Korashk]

I asked "is it possible" in my first postulation that can both theories co-exist with each other
No no no no no. For one, creatioism IS NOT a theory. It isn't even a proper hypothesis. If I had to give it an adjective I'd call it a notion. Second, creationism and evolution absolutely CAN NOT exist together. They are mutually exclusive ideas.

And since it is possible, then there is always doubt in any theory you support.
Not in any sense that matters. To deny evolution is to deny that the reality we live in is real and everything we observe is an illusion.

[aussiebunnie]

Second, creationism and evolution absolutely CAN NOT exist together. They are mutually exclusive ideas..

See this is something I don't understand. Say (DISCLAIMER: This is a half arsed theory) Evolution is true and all the scientific facts are true. A modification of that theory can be that God had created a single cell and designed the world so perfectly that the single cell evolved to what we are today. Why can they not co-exist, unless you are saying that the theory of evolution MUST NEVER include God.

[Korashk]

See this is something I don't understand. Say (DISCLAIMER: This is a half arsed theory) Evolution is true and all the scientific facts are true. A modification of that theory can be that God had created a single cell and designed the world so perfectly that the single cell evolved to what we are today. Why can they not co-exist, unless you are saying that the theory of evolution MUST NEVER include God.
When most people say 'creationism', that's not what they're referring to, and not what this thread is meant to tackle. It's what's commonly referred to as 'theistic evolution'.

[aussiebunnie]

I guess I have a completely different view on creationism then from the way they taught us in school.

[Sage]

Why can they not co-exist, unless you are saying that the theory of evolution MUST NEVER include God.

Scientifically speaking, the theory is never going to include God because God is not factual.

[Genghis Khan]

See this is something I don't understand. Say (DISCLAIMER: This is a half arsed theory) Evolution is true and all the scientific facts are true. A modification of that theory can be that God had created a single cell and designed the world so perfectly that the single cell evolved to what we are today. Why can they not co-exist, unless you are saying that the theory of evolution MUST NEVER include God.

In order to apply that modification you'd have to prove that God exists, and if he does, is he the Judeo-Christian, Islamic, Sikh or Zoroastrian God? Or is he some other type of superpower that is everything the ancient texts say God isn't?

'Why can they not co-exist?' - Because your modification is based on your own selective reality. I could just as easily come up with some bullshit theory about the Greek Gods creating us in their image and that somehow links to evolution but it wouldn't be plausible because I'm making an argument from personal belief.

[aussiebunnie]

Scientifically speaking, the theory is never going to include God because God is not factual.

If thats the test you are using, we can never really prove that God exists. If someone does come up with factual proof that he exists, then that would undermine the notion that God and religion is based on faith and belief.

[Sage]

If thats the test you are using, we can never really prove that God exists.

Now you've got the right idea.

[Harlequin]

So much we do not understand for we are just moving outwards in our track, I am of the belief that "god(s)" created evolution so that species can grow and we can adapt better for our world. Also how else would have gotten our fossil fuels?

I am also of the firm opinion that the Gaia Hypothesis is Partially True

[Magus]

Gravity doesn't go against faith or people's religious beliefs. Evolution does because Christians and Muslims believe God made us in his image, nawt dat w3 all ev0lv3d fram dem smely ol' monkeys. Although the original Islamic system never really had a problem with evolution or the big bang, it's recent creationist Muslims that are insisting science is wrong and their 4th Century scriptures rule us all.Actually 7th century. And no, Muslims do not believe god made humans into his image.

God is an incomprehensible abstract being. And so says my wad of tomes.
http://i750.photobucket.com/albums/xx144/deadlydreamerx/Allahu-Akbaru.jpg

Yes, Muslim has a bit tolerance to science more than Christians. But some insists that we are from Adam, made from Mud.

[aussiebunnie]

Now you've got the right idea.

Do you have colt going or something?

[Sage]

Do you have colt going or something?

No, I only use Smith and Wesson firearms. But in case that was a typo and you meant 'cult', why do you ask?

[RoseyCadaver]

Do you have colt going or something?

No, he is proving a point.In what way does that make him have a colt(which I think you mean cult,not a gun or baby horse) going on :confused:?

So if you believe in evolution,you are in a cult?

[aussiebunnie]

No, I only use Smith and Wesson firearms. But in case that was a typo and you meant 'cult', why do you ask?

Well you just remind of Satan from the Book of Job. That's all.

[Sage]

Well you just remind of Satan from the Book of Job. That's all.

How?

[RoseyCadaver]

Well you just remind of Satan from the Book of Job. That's all.

C'mon sweetie ,lets go back to bed.Besides,it's also time for your medicine XD.

[aussiebunnie]

How?

You seem to dislike the concept of God.

[Sage]

You seem to dislike the concept of God.

That would be correct, but for the purposes of this debate, it's irrelevant. To be fair, this is somewhat of a derailment from the topic and if you want to talk about such personal things you're better off VMing me.

[RoseyCadaver]

You seem to dislike the concept of God.

I guess there are more Satans then I thought O.o.

[The Joker]

You seem to dislike the concept of God.

I'd just like to note that many people who think a God does not exist also do not believe in 'Satan', so your statement was pretty irrelevant.

[Goldilokks]

Could it be possible that God designed the World so that we could evolve into human beings, therefore meaning both theories are true?

I think its a possibility i was raised a cristian but i cant let go of it and become aithiest so i settled for the just right porrige

[Sage]

i was raised a cristian but i cant let go of it and become aithiest

Why not?

[Magus]

Why not?Because Allah will be angry.

[RoseyCadaver]

Because Allah will be angry.

I believe his name is JEsUs thank ya xD!

[Magus]

I believe his name is JEsUs thank ya xD!Jesus is a guy. Allah is a God. Big difference. BIG BIG Difference.

[Genghis Khan]

Yes, Muslim has a bit tolerance to science more than Christians. But some insists that we are from Adam, made from Mud.

IQRA' BI- ISM RABB -KA 'ALLADHE KHALAQA.

Read! In the Name of your Lord, Who has created (all that exists)
KHALAQA AL- 'INSAAN MIN ALAQ
Created man from a clinging substance.
IQRA' WA- RABB -KA AL- AKRAM
Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous,
'ALLADHE ALLAMA BI- AL- QALAM
He Who taught (the use of) the Pen
ALLAMA AL- 'INSAAN MAA LAM YAcLAM
Taught man that which he knew not.

- Surah Al-Alaq. We're on the same page. My only point was, this is only a recent event that scholars (Zakir Naik, Harun Yahya) are claiming that evolution and Islam do not go together, when really, they are just adopting Creationist values from the Bible and Torah. The Qur'an itself is more open to scientific ideas than the Bible.


Jesus is a guy. Allah is a God. Big difference. BIG BIG Difference.

Some Christians regard Jesus as their God. The only difference is, we Muslims don't, and we're obviously right because we're Muslims.

[Magus]

IQRA' BI- ISM RABB -KA 'ALLADHE KHALAQA.
Read! In the Name of your Lord, Who has created (all that exists)
KHALAQA AL- 'INSAAN MIN ALAQ
Created man from a clinging substance.
IQRA' WA- RABB -KA AL- AKRAM
Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous,
'ALLADHE ALLAMA BI- AL- QALAM
He Who taught (the use of) the Pen
ALLAMA AL- 'INSAAN MAA LAM YAcLAM
Taught man that which he knew not.

I have debunked this claim. But yeah, Quran has some more to offer versus a book that's 3000+ year old(the old testament).

[HaydenM]

Could it be possible that God designed the World so that we could evolve into human beings, therefore meaning both theories are true?

no because the bible states that god created us in his own image and that everything is as it always has been and always will be.

[RoseyCadaver]

no because the bible states that god created us in his own image and that everything is as it always has been and always will be.

It also says a senior citizen made a big ass ark gathering all the animals of the world and some how manage to stay on there quite some time .

I find people who believe the bible in a literal sense rather stu....silly,and as someone said ,not sure who,we made God in our image,God didn't make us in his.

[aussiebunnie]

I find people who believe the bible in a literal sense rather stu....silly,and as someone said ,not sure who,we made God in our image,God didn't make us in his.

Yes, if you believe the Bible literally, you would have to against homosexuality, which in the Bible was written in the context of a lack of foundation on reproduction. See Sodom and Gomorrah.

If a person who is illiterate (not his own fault), but believes in a God I don't think he would be treated any differently to someone who has read the Bible.

[RoseyCadaver]

Yes, if you believe the Bible literally, you would have to against homosexuality, which in the Bible was written in the context of a lack of foundation on reproduction. See Sodom and Gomorrah.



Well that, and the fact that I don't think a God just made the book fall out of the sky either.I believe it was written for good,but over time altered so people would have to follow others or be feared in going into a place full of fire and brim stone.

I also don't believe a true God could hate his own creation over small things like what you want to marry or fuck.Thats just me :rolleyes:

"Jesus,a cool guy with a not so cool fan base."


If a person who is illiterate (not his own fault), but believes in a God I don't think he would be treated any differently to someone who has read the Bible.

Well put,respect to you:yes:.

[Genghis Khan]

I believe it was written for good,but over time altered so people would have to follow others or be feared in going into a place full of fire and brim stone.

Well that, and cultural things which at that time were considered fine but when applied to today's society = barbaric and ruthless. Application of religion into a modern society is important, that is why even I as an atheist promote the study of religion in context so people can understand what in these ancient texts are cultural/social and what can be applied to today's society.

[embers]

Yes, if you believe the Bible literally, you would have to against homosexuality, which in the Bible was written in the context of a lack of foundation on reproduction. See Sodom and Gomorrah.

If a person who is illiterate (not his own fault), but believes in a God I don't think he would be treated any differently to someone who has read the Bible.

This brings me to a question: What do you think of God's morality in the Old Testament (http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2010/04/drunk-with-blood-gods-killings-in-bible.html), and why did it change to what it has been since the New?

[Ryhanna]

Really, you can twist and turn God to suit fact. Such as that "God designed the world so that we could evolve into human beings" theory. It's just a theory, with absolutely no evidence to back it up.

The fact that God can be so easily twisted to explain what science has discovered proves that God is bullshite, really. If it had any real substance to it, it wouldn't need to be changed or explained.