Creation or Evolution?, Which do you believe in? Options

[sadolakced acid]

beside the point, but if evolution didn't exist, we'd all still be using penicillin. seeing as the only reason we need new antibiotics is that bacteria have evolved to become resistant.

[*mipadi*]

And how exactly does that disprove creationism? A Christian could easily point out that that's a limited form of genetic mutation, or evolution, in a specific organism that may or may not apply to human beings. And even barring that argument, I've already pointed out several times how a person who uses modern medicine can still hold a belief compatible with creationism.

[sadolakced acid]

but i'm not argueing that they shouldn't believe in creationism; i'm saying they should believe in evolution.

as we've said before, the two are not mutually exclusive, unless you believe in a strict reading of the bible.

[*mipadi*]

They both outline different ways for the emergence of human beings; how can one believe in both?

[SideStraddleHop]

As mipadi alluded "A Christian could easily point out that that's a limited form of genetic mutation, or evolution, in a specific organism that may or may not apply to human beings." The distinction must be made between macro- and micro- evolution. Microevolution is compatible with religion and is provable. Macroevolution is incompatible with religion and is debunkable. The use of straw-men runs so rampant in this debate on every level that it is almost impossible to understand the "other" side by simply reading the debate. You may think you know something about evolution or creationism, when in actuality all you know is some caricature of the other side's view. If anything, the debate is good for both sides, because it forces intellectual honesty.
One thing that remains certain is that the philosophical underpinnings of the debate are hit upon but very rarely discussed. For most people, epistomology is the very basis of this argument. You must identify and select the (edit:)epistomology that you will subscribe to and accept it as dogma. So the question becomes: Materialism or Idealism or a combination of the two. All proponents of Macroevolution will insist on Strict materialism. Are you willing to buy their brand of reality simply because "everybody's doing it"?

[george_fred]

Creation. Scientifically it makes more sense. What got the ball rolling?

[*disco infiltrator*]

^ That's a good question; can you answer it about Creationism?

[NoSex]

Creation. Scientifically it makes more sense. What got the ball rolling?

Creation isn't exactly scientific as it almost inherently suggests the supernatural. Science does not even suspect the supernatural as such a phenomena could not be tested, observed, detected, and understood. Such a phenomena would also remain incoherent against current scientific knowledge and would ultimately fall into nonfalsifiable realms. Science only operates within the regions of the universe that it can detect and begin to understand and explain.

Because of this, Creation may make more philosophical sense, but it, inherently, is unscientific.

[SideStraddleHop]

Disco- I am unwilling to accept the dogma of strict materialism. I reject macro-evolution on the same grounds that atheists reject God. I cannot honestly bring myself to believe something that there is no evidence for and cannot be tested. I believe in creation, because I know we can receive knowledge through what I will call "spiritual evidence".

Because of this, Creation may make more philosophical sense, but it, inherently, is unscientific.

Good point. Ex nihilo creationism is not biblical. A more contemporary translation of the Hebrew word that was translated "created" is "formed", which implies materials already were extant.

[sadolakced acid]

whoa whoa there...

back up.

no evidence for evolution and it cannot be tested for?

try again.

the experiements just take time. first with flys, some 80 generations, speciation was obserbed.

then the mice experiments started to have been areound long enough, with some 120 generations. speiciation was obserbed.

and like it or not; this is the only thing that evolution says. it doesn't say all life came from a primodial soup- it says species change overtime and can seperate into new species by natural selection.

[george_fred]

^ That's a good question; can you answer it about Creationism?

In creation it says God was always there. In evolution it says things just happened. I'm so bad at trying to write what I mean. >_< Basically science says something has to get the ball rolling yet by evolution it makes that void which = evolution makes no sense to me.

[sadolakced acid]

how exactley did got create the things?

did he use his hands?

his feet?

did he just think it and then it was?

what if someday he forgot to think about the earth?

[NoSex]

In creation it says God was always there. In evolution it says things just happened. I'm so bad at trying to write what I mean. >_< Basically science says something has to get the ball rolling yet by evolution it makes that void which = evolution makes no sense to me.

It's apparent that you don't know what exactly evolution is. The theory of evolution isn't even about the origin of life, it is simply a theory to explain the diversity of life. You are mistaking evolution for The Big Bang Theory or maybe Abiogenesis. Evolution isn't about "getting the ball rolling." And, certain regions of science observe and recognize "balls rolling" without anything getting it "started." For example, virtual particals in quantum physics.

Read about The Theory of Evolution. Learn a decent amount about it. Then, come back if you have questions.

[CuteCosmic]

I putting my two cents on this issue........I didn't want to read the 30 pages of the posts so here is my opinion/theory/thought on this subject matter........

I think both are at play in evolution and creationism......... The only difference is this........ evolution is the detailed portion from the big picture.....and creationism is the sybolism and construst where it has been formed for the details to work with........did that make any sense whatsoever? o_O;;

I don't know if I made any sense whatsoever.....but both has flaws but both also has good points........ T__T;; Please don't attack me......I'm only stating my opinion......thank you very much! ^_^;;;;;;;

As for the person who said that the Bible was written by God is totally false IN MY OPINION. I'm sorry. (I don't think I need to prove my faith to you human beings.....that's between me and God alone.) The reason why I say that is this.....God may have told the ppl to write His Words down and make them the Holy Law.......I agree with you on this....however, you cannot say that God wrote it........Humans did and we all know humans makes mistakes, therefore the Bible is slightly misconstrued......if not alot bias (INCLUDING THAT IT'S ORGINAL LANGUAGE IS TOTALLY DIFFERERNT LANGUAGE!!!)........You have to also understand that they used the old languages where it can hav totally different meanings from what we may think of it NOW.....If that wasn't worse, they are also in symbolism.....and some play on words as well.....AND THERE ARE ALSO SOME CULTURAL DIFFERENCES TOO.........

And last but definitely not least......humans also think differently and write in a way how they were brought up and taught and their own little belief structure that is totally different from everyone....... how can one expect to dicepire the true meaning of God's mind and thoughts? That would be very arrogant and bombastic of them to say so if they called themselves true believers of God, wouldn't you say? I mean think about it......and I mean think about it deeply and not emotionally......think of it in both point of ways as well as the similarities if you must to understand the meanings.........

To give a good example, a word like "love" can mean differently from all sorts of ppl......

One person can describe that term to be something you say and feel between your family or lover or your God.... Some describe the term of their favorite food or favorite pet that they hold dear to them........ And some describe it as an enigma you cannot see or touch or anything.....it's basically a construct you sense not neccessaily through material needs......

And others may think of it as a bond that cannot be broken.....Something that is soo deep that you don't break and if you do, you literally die.....or at leats a big part of you do to some.......

Anyways.........

There are soo many interpretations to the Bible, I truly disagree with the person who said that the Bible was written by God........ I can see the symbolism they are talking about but that's pretty naiive (in my opinion) to be bluntly and blatantly say that God wrote the Bible when it was God's worshipers that wrote it to their interpretations and own belief structure they had in mind......

And that's not even including the missing pieces of script of the Bible as well as the corrupt politicians who tried and may have (who knows?) sabbataged the Bible to their advantage to for example: win a war, control a mass amount of ppl, whatever!

I'm not saying that it did happen, but you cannot just blindly follow something without giving alot of research and thought and when I mean thought.....I mean deep DEEP deep thought on the issues......I do agree that you need to have faith, you cant be skeptically when faith is the issue.......but hey, it doesn't hurt to find out what you want to find out before plunging into a relationship that will affect your life forever, ya know? Some may consider it like a trust issue......Some trust it full heartedly without caring or knowing about the dangers or consequences of it...........and others are just more careful around these subject matters..... You cannot condemn others for not following your beliefs and you cannot put down others for believe something....its their choice.....just make sure that neither side is pressuring the other to do something about it when it will only give negative backlash to it as a major consequences......

To anyone who's reading this......I did not mean to offend anyone with any beliefs or whatnot...... I'm just here to state my opinion on this subject matter as well as that one part about the Bible......sorry for going slightly off topic....... T_T;;

If anyone wants to discuss this with me, please pm me cuz I'm too lazy to go back and read what the other ppl wrote to me......I have school and work and etc.....I don't think I can find the time to take the time to rebutt......but if you want.....you're going to have to pm me..... Thank you! ^_^;;

That's my two cents......lol XD And hopefully I made some kind of sense......I tend to keep going on and on so if you do not understand, please ask me and I'll be willing to make better understandment for you........ you just gotta pm me.....lol XD

~CuteCosmic~

[*disco infiltrator*]

Is your name Jade? (Sorry, that was for Nate. I don't really think your name is Jade.)

But yea...learn to use periods.
Other than that, thank you for your views. You aren't following blindly. That's good. Go you. You should celebrate. Though, you might want to post this in the God thread. You didn't really make any points concerning creationism vs. evolution.

[seriouslynikki]

I pick creation!
As Evolution has taught us, all things come from a common ancestor.
THEY said that we come from apes. Who came before the apes?
Why did the evolution from apes to humans stop at humans?

Someone even found the Noah's Ark.
It was exactly how the Bible told it was.
this whole thing was on the news.

How did this good and evil start?
There MUST be an answer to how THAT started.
God and the Devil.

[Retrogressive]

whoa whoa there...

back up.

no evidence for evolution and it cannot be tested for?

try again.

the experiements just take time.  first with flys, some 80 generations, speciation was obserbed. 

then the mice experiments started to have been areound long enough, with some 120 generations.  speiciation was obserbed.

and like it or not; this is the only thing that evolution says.  it doesn't say all life came from a primodial soup- it says species change overtime and can seperate into new species by natural selection.

hip hip horray.

[*mipadi*]

Someone even found the Noah's Ark.
It was exactly how the Bible told it was.
this whole thing was on the news.

Weekly World News isn't a legitimate news source.

But it does have Batboy.

[*disco infiltrator*]

I pick creation!
As Evolution has taught us, all things come from a common ancestor.
THEY said that we come from apes. Who came before the apes?
Why did the evolution from apes to humans stop at humans?

Someone even found the Noah's Ark.
It was exactly how the Bible told it was.
this whole thing was on the news.

How did this good and evil start?
There MUST be an answer to how THAT started.
God and the Devil.

WE DID NOT COME FROM APES.
If we came FROM apes, apes wouldn't be here today. As YOU SAID YOURSELF, both hominids and lesser-evolved primates came from a COMMON ANCESTOR, not one from the other. That common ancestor, a very early primate, evolved from other things that had similar characteristics to primates.

Seriously, do you guys pay attention in Bio? All of these questions are answered for you throughout the evolution unit.

[NoSex]

I pick creation!
As Evolution has taught us, all things come from a common ancestor.

All living species today. Yeah.

THEY said that we come from apes.

Not modern apes. Not what we know today as apes. We came from very very ancient apes.

Who came before the apes?

Even more ancient apes.

Why did the evolution from apes to humans stop at humans?

Well, it didn't exactly stop. We are still evolving. However, it isn't as significant an evolutionary movement because of the simple fact that major evolutionary change, in most cases, requires limiting factors. Human beings, as the most advanced of animal species, as very few limiting factors, and our evolutionary movement would be exprected to move at a very slow pace.

Someone even found the Noah's Ark.
It was exactly how the Bible told it was.
this whole thing was on the news.

You might want to be more specific, however, I think I can still solve this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah%27s_Ark_hoaxes

How did this good and evil start?
There MUST be an answer to how THAT started.
God and the Devil.

Good and evil is a fairy tale. They aren't real forces acting in the universe. They are just words that human beings subscribe to explain their subject taste for certain things in our experience.

If we came FROM apes, apes wouldn't be here today.

Everything you said was correct, aside from this single statement. Nothing in the Theory of Evolution suggets that after a new species emerges that its ancestral counterpart must go extinct. The way evolution works often allows for just the opposite. A new species will branch off from another, and the latter will continue to survive.

[sadolakced acid]

1- humans are still evolving. most people are slightly taller than their parents. (look at old knights armor, and think that was the size of thier arnold swearseneggers)

2- "noah's ark", or the mt. arrarat anomoly, is either a strange looking rock crag, or actually a boat. convieniently, it is not possible to find out. however; i seriously doubt there is enough water in the world to flood to the top of mount arrarat, and glaciers move down.

3- evolution doesn't care how things got started. it cares about how things change and become different and new species.

[simx]

Evolution

[sadolakced acid]

okay, i know the topic title says "which do you believe in", but in debate, we generally try to say why.

so, yea, if you could do that, as well as follow the other debate forum rules, that would be great.

[*ranniel*]

i stand for both. We have been created, but evolution is natural or it can be a good mutation. i go for evolution which is caused by natural selection and mutation.

[NoSex]

okay, i know the topic title says "which do you believe in", but in debate, we generally try to say why.

so, yea, if you could do that, as well as follow the other debate forum rules, that would be great.

Post 1.

i stand for both. We have been created, but evolution is natural or it can be a good mutation. i go for evolution which is caused by natural selection and mutation.

Post 2.

One after the other. Please, at least read the first few posts and the last few posts before making a post. Seriously. Thank you.