Creationism vs. Evolution

I vote for evolution.

 

Why... Why must you take a healthy debate to the point of personal attacks. Why is it that you must slander people for disagreeing with you. I have lost respect for people that do these kinds of things.

Completely agreed.

 

Let me ask about the information contained within the evolutionary process then. In the beginning there was nothing, it exploded and after billions of years eventually the earth formed and there was rock formed and then water formed then in the water the first one celled critters formed. Complex little buggers. The information to create food, or get food. to turn that food to energy, to expel waste, to reproduce. Being the first one celled critter where did this information come from? The information that a single celled organism has is so complex could fill the library of congress. Then what about when it went to a multi-celled organism and the complexity quadrupled. Each time you step up the evolutionary process the system grows with more energy and more intelligence. The problem with this is that over time systems degrade not enhance.

Here is one of the many coverups that have been presented to try and show evolution in action.

http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/photo_database/image/the_peppered_moth/

 

Bob... Bob... Bobby Bouchers' got it figured out!

 

There has been no name calling, nor vile words. No one has yelled 'Blood Libel!' The closest thing to an attack has been an attack on the argument, not on the person.

But ... then ... I agree reasonable minds can differ on this judgment.

And I concede that it is difficult to be moderate in criticizing an argument that relies the proponent's stupendous ignorance of basic facts to support its specious and absurd claims. How does one address a hopelessly stupid argument based on incomprehensible ignorance, without saying that's what it is?

This is different from calling the misguided and educationally challenged person a moron. THAT would be name calling and a personal attack.

 

...

 

why is it still called the "THEORY" of evolution when you say its claims have been proven over and over again. scientists have years and years worth of factual evidence that evolution has happened, is happening, and so forth. yet no one acknowledges it as "The Proven Fact of Evolution". if it's philosophies and studies can be placed in front of a jury and proven to be true, it seems someone would make a push to have it labeled as such.

on the same token, why don't evolutionists label Christianity as "The Theory that a Savior Exists"? or "the theory of an instructional book that tells you how to get to a magic place of gold"?

 

^^^^

1. Because we can't recreate the effect of evolution in a lab, unless you have a time machine on you.

2. I'm pretty sure scientists have better things to do than to label certain religions with ironic silly names.

 

i'm not asking for it to be recreated. that actually has nothing to do with what i asked. and apparently it doesn't need to be recreated because there is overwhelming evidence all around us.

and i'm also pretty certain that there are scientists and philosophers who do nothing but label religions and ideologies.

so my question still remains.

 

Ummm, he just answered your question. It is a THEORY because it cannot be 100% proven. It is basically scientists keeping an OPEN mind but it has also had over 100 years of study and enough evidence to be a well-documented theory. The reason it is still theory is because nobody can prove it for all species, but it is proven for some species. You can actually see evolution by watching bacteria replicate in the presence of an anti-bacterial substance, some of them have an inborn defense and when exposed to the antibacterial substance they will survive and multiply, and eventually the bacteria will all have that resistance.

I give up, this thread has been going on in circles for a long, long, long time. I've said it before, some people just don't want to let facts get in their way.

 

One quick example: It's called the THEORY of gravitation. That does not mean that gravity is speculation or a mere unproven theory.

No one refers to the 'theory of Christ' because it is not a scientific proposition.
Evolution is falsifiable, i.e. if theory were false, facts could be found to show it is impossible or at least improbable.

Assuming Jesus is not divine, what evidence could be produced by experiment to show that proposition to be true? All we have is our experience and knowledge of how things work with every other human to say his divinity and supernatural powers are false claims, but we cannot set up an experiment to verify this common sense conclusion.

 

When looking at the manner in which both sides are defending themselves in this argument, I see one rather large difference. Those who are defending evolution are doing so by presenting evolution as a fact, and they are backed up by years of scientific data. Those defending creationism are presenting it as faith. I do not recall reading a single post where the person was defending creationism as fact. It seems to be a pretty clear distinction to me...we are arguing fact vs. fiction.

I hope many of you are aware that there are people in this world who firmly "believe" that the Earth is flat. And there are many people who "believe" that the holocaust never occurred. Both of these groups firmly "believe" in what they preach, and they have total "faith" that they are correct. But does that change the fact that the Earth is a sphere? Or that the holocaust did in fact occur?

Just because you don't want to accept something as a fact, does not make it so.

I also wanted to ask a few questions to the religious posters in this thread. Are you aware of how many different religions there are? Some are monotheistic, others are polytheistic, all worship different deities, and all preach different ways in which the Earth was created. Do you believe that other religions are incorrect in what they believe since many of their beliefs contradict your own? What makes their ideas wrong, and yours right? Don't you think that the people of other religions feel as adamantly about their beliefs as you do?

What do you think happens when you die? Some religions believe in heaven. Others believe in reincarnation. Atheists believe that when you die, you die...that's it. Since inevitably we all have the same fate when we die, only one of these ideas can be correct. Which is it? How can you say you are right, and they are wrong?

The Earth was created in one specific way. That means there is only ONE explanation for how it was created. So far science has the best and most substantiated theory on how it all happened. Yet, there are numerous amounts of different religions which preach their own ideas on how it occurred. But only one of these groups can be right, and inevitably, that means everyone else is wrong. So only one out of 1000 can be right...your odds are not good.

 

you say that as if it is fact. It is not a fact! (do you see where this can go) I refuse to constantly give info that dissproves evolution and proves creation. I just want a few simple questions about evolution answered so I can have a firm foundation as to why I should believe evolution. Do I need to repeat my questions folks? I've said them time and again througout this thread.

Well here you go.........I vacationed at Niagara falls last summer and did some research about these 'facts' and 'proofs' you are desiring. I don't have time to explain all my personal findings, but here is a link that sums it up well. Remember, we must all do our own research.

I don't have time to read all these long posts, not to mention I lose interest when unproven theories are called facts and my beliefs are discounted as ignorant.

 

Oh I don;t know.....the odds of the earth and all the planets lining up in perfect orbit around the Sun and the earth being at the perfect distance, orbit and tilt to support life with a single mooon controlling the tides....the odds of that happening by "chance" has to be equivalent to a tornado ripping through a junkyard and creating a fully functional 747.......

If one doesn't believe in that being a chance event...one cannot believe that from which evolved from it is.

That is why I believe in creation....the perfect mortality of life itself. The thing man calls "Mother Nature" is the "creator" I see that everyday when I look out my back window at the water, trees, Herons, ducks, ...... Of course I can understand how someone who lives in a large city doesn't "see" the beauty of "natural" creation and only man's creations eroding their belief in anything more than man.

Creation is a fact for me until man can create life from nothing in a petri dish under the same exact atmospheric conditions that were present when he claims life was created.

That said man's bastardized creation of religion in his quest to control others, is the bane of the world and I am sure of the Creator.

 

If you do not believe in evolution you are ignorant. That is not name calling and ruining a debate. The debate was creationism vs evolution, yet I never said that in believing in evolution can you not believe in creationism.

If you have faith that is fantastic and I am happy for you. But to disregard evolution and say there is no evidence is ignorant.

An argument for those of faith: Just say God created evolution and pull the trump card and be done with it.

 

Can you show me any evidence that does not come from a 2,000 year old book that supports that claim?

I can show you 4.4 million years of proof of evolution.

And that isnt even my point. My point is that you can believe in both. But to not believe in science is to ignore the world around you.

 

MEDULA OBLONGATA!

 

You're wrong, Colonel Sanders....