Evolution Vs. Creation

11 Comments to “Evolution Vs. Creation”

1. Jones says:

   December 22, 2009 at 8:36 pm

   Hey everybody, Thought I'd provide my $0.02 here. Upon reviewing and considering this very common debate, I've made a few observations. Primarily, it's that the argument is essentially just an argument of semantics. I see that people disagree primarily because they don't understand one another. This is leading to quite a few strong assumptions, and isn't helping any in a negotiation effort. Evolution is technically still a theory, however one must understand scientific method to a good degree prior to making implications as to what "theory" really means. It can be a very deceiving word. If something is a theory, it just means that a definitive proof (which is incredibly substantial) has not been provided. In the case of evolution, it will likely always be a theory, as indefinite proof of this concept is next to impossible. However, using this "theory" of evolution, one can still do limitless amounts of testing and predictions, all of which will provide correct results. It's like a mathematical equation: you can use the equation all day long, but just because you receive perfectly correct results a thousand times in a row does not mean that the equation is proven. Another example is continental drift - the theory of tectonic plates. At some point, there was an enormous amount of evidence for its existence. However, evidence, no matter how voluminous, does not make a theory into a law. As such, the "theory" of evolution can and should be considered fact. The amount of evidence that supports it is incredibly large. Hundreds of thousands of people worldwide dedicate their lives to research that depends on the theory of evolution. The degree of evidence that exists for evolution is so substantial that it is literally impossible for the theory to be false. I would like to kindly add this: Just because you do not understand something, doesn't mean that it is wrong. If you have difficulty understanding the concept of evolution, please impartially seek information on it. I have noticed many religious partisans seeking false information to simply further perpetuate their opinions on the subject. This is harmful and unethical, especially when one is the decision maker for the education of others. Anyways, I would like to continue with my opinions on the implications of evolution: Evolution does ~not~ (and cannot) disprove God. To fear from the education of this brilliant concept and incredible piece of work that us as humans have accomplished is terrible. To simply reassure oneself that their beliefs are correct is plain silly. The way I see it, there is nothing to be afraid of. Evolution is a part of life, and a part of God. Science and technology are a part of this world, and a part of our life. I see it as a felony to turn a blind eye from them, to turn a blind eye from reality. I think that a true belief, a true connection with God, is devoid of all contradictions. This meaning that one's association to God could not possibly be harmed by any exterior concept. This is not to say that one ignores certain realities, but rather encompasses them all. This is because God encompasses all, and is all in this world. If you truly disbelieve evolution, then I ask you to obtain a degree in it, prior to disagreeing with it. Fully understand it before you attack. Then you can properly analyze any contradictions that you find, and if you're correct, will do very well for the world.

   Reply
2. Shawn says:

   November 11, 2009 at 9:34 am

   Please use reason. Theory of gravity has been proven but not of evolution .The best established facts of genetics,biology and botany do not favor evolutionism .As for the Darwin finches, he Assumed that a single poulation of finches came to the island and diversified into a new species. He further assumed these variations supported his contention that whole new kinds of animals could eventually be produced by such a process. That life could use small changes to develop upward all the way to man. Huh? 2nd law of thermodynamics anyone! Natural selection is not capable of producing anything new, Its just a conservation process in nature to weed out the sick etc, and buck the 2nd law of thermodynamics . Evolutionist want to believe their theory and will continue to stick square pegs in round holes. Dna and Rna should have awaken a few from their blindness

   Reply
3. Michael says:

   February 22, 2008 at 6:10 pm

   ArineUh, Tim, and other creationists....to suggest that evolution is UNproven because you haven't seen a half spider, half dog or some such retarted nonsense, only proves that you have NO idea what the hell you're talking about. ALSO...Evolutionary theory makes NO claims whatever to explain how life originated. It just doesn't. Darwin's theory of Natural Selection is his idea as to the means by which the forces of evolution sculpt and modify through descent within any given system, affecting change on levels applicable ONLY to individuals within a species, NOT species themselves. I understand that it's much better to be spoonfed horse crap than it is to have to research, read and comprehend, but I promise you, folks, we have evolved WAY past the need for anything as stunting and harmful as christianity. Mystery, and discovery over time as a result of honest hard work and curiosity is way better for us as species and individuals, than the blind adherence to dogmatic, divisive, hateful and anti-human superstitions like the three monstrous mono-theistic brain killers--christianity, islam and judaism. Creationists...I offer this advice. Ruminate and cogitate before you regurgitate.

   Reply
4. Tim says:

   October 9, 2007 at 12:52 pm

   Creation = Belief. Evolutionay theory = people not willing to believe they will have to account for their actions. Evolutionary theory... Has a half lizard half dog bone ever been found? or how about a half spider monkey half human bone ever been found. "Lucy" was proven a hoax, and so was every other "prehistoric man" out there. If things took billions of years to evolve, don't you think we would have some kind of real bones out there to show it??? Or did the dinosaurs eat all of those before a giant "earth crushing meteor" hit us??? Which by the way would have killed us all instantly and sent back evolution another few billion years... Faith in God = the ability to understand that we're wrong in how we act. The bible is true, if you don't believe it, then go ask King Herod, go ask Caesar, go ask Christopher Columbus (Christian), and 3/4 of all the worlds historically named people, they were ALL CHRISTIANS!!! Seems to me like GOD was planning something,, hmmmm.... But people that don't have FAITH, like to live life they way they want to, plain and simple, why even have a thought about another being higher than us, then we have to think of how obsurd and negative, and murderous we are, GUILT??? oh no, i don't want that on my concious. Faith in God = Life as we know it. Evolution = Show some facts!!! Did you know, that in order for these micro organisms to "spawn" into life, it would have taken that organism to PERFECTLY fold onto itself 175 trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, and trillion times to create the first visible organisms... WHAT?!?! if someone believes in that, then they have FAITH !!! In men, oh, and also, Darwin before he died admitted that he was wrong. Must have felt good while he was alive to make millions, and then right before he died had a sudden change of heart!!! LAUGHS, he must have looked up and thought to himself, God forgive me, because after all, we all, and when i say we all, i mean we all, muslims, to athiest, use the name Jesus Christ, and God D@nit, so why is it that we all use those words to blasphemy GOD??? If he isn't real, why is it that it feels like it's been built into our very nature to say these things??? Why don't we curse Gondhi,or Bhudda??? Jesus Christ = Saving Grace

   Reply
5. arwin john says:

   August 22, 2007 at 6:29 am

   i dont believe 2 that because god creates us

   Reply
6. Spencer J says:

   February 27, 2007 at 11:53 pm

   Evolution has basically been proven.......

   Reply
7. Evan Loughlin says:

   February 5, 2007 at 6:21 pm

   Quote "There is SCIENTIFIC PROOF that completely disproves any theory of evolution." You have stated to us that there is an all defining truth to disprove a generally accepted theory.. Well, where is it? The only 'proof' you've provided us with seems to be you expaining to us how loving God is. We are living in a scientific and technological revolution at this time. We now understand more logic than ever before, yet the general American population refuses to release the evidently incorrect theory of creationism, which was, by the way conjured over 2000 years ago. 2000! If you're 16, that's 125 of your *entire* lifetimes. Since the initial recording of time, we've breached the outer limits of our world, launched giant mechanical flying machines into the air, reduced the limits of travel by months, cured epidemics, given sight to the blind, cloned sheep. (Created *life*). Our new world has advanced so far ahead to the point that any one person's capibility to comprehend all knowledge has long since been surpassed. Yet nearly 80% of America insists on believing a book written by mortal men, providing no logical evidence to support their theory, over two milleniums ago. I'm not attempting to challenge your religious beliefs, for man has yet to prove the life one lives after death. You may continue to believe that once you die, your soul either floats to a shiny white castle, or falls to an infinity of suffering - which is, by the way all coorespondant to the degree of a man's loyalty to God. (Manipulative controlling black-mail?) One more point, only 22% of Americans with post-graduate degrees solely believe in creationism. ( Intelligence correlates with belief ) I hope you've learned something today. Thank you.

   Reply
8. Emily Levinson says:

   January 30, 2007 at 5:47 pm

   Ok, look. I am sixteen years old, but I have more knowledge on this subject than you, I believe. Check out Genesis 1:1. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. It doesn't say in the beginning God created some stuff and over time it changed because God just let it take on a life of its own and run wild. No. it goes on to say that God looked at it at the end of EVERY DAY and said it was GOOD. As in God�s creation is perfect and did not, WAS NOT altered or in need of alteration. He is a perfect God and when he makes something, he has a plan for it. Do you think he is up there saying, �Hmmm... what if I just let that little animal down there change its whole species, just for kicks? Boy that�ll be funny in a thousand years watching them scratch their heads trying to figure out what the heck happened.� No. He is a God of love who wants us to look at His creation and know that He is God. Look at Romans 1:19-20. It basically says that when people look at His creation, they automatically should see Him in it and praise Him. As far as the subject of believing evolution should be taught as theory and only fact � RIGHT ON! Evolution should be taught as a theory that should hold a purely historical meaning in text books. Any science textbook that still says evolution is a factual solid theory is severely out dated. Have you SEEN how of creationism blows evolution out of the water? There is SCIENTIFIC PROOF that completely disproves any theory of evolution. It makes it seem ridiculous � like an imaginative kid who wanted to dream up a new way of how the earth was created. My dad and I will read articles to each other by secular scientists and evolutionists and crack up from their 3rd grade-like absurdity. Giving the theory of creation only a brief mention does no justice to the theory at all. What are we teaching the students if we ask teachers to only give the possible theory of creation only a brief mention? We�re laying it on a platter for kids to see and telling them, �OK, here�s two possible options: one (pointing to evolution) is evolution and here�s this other one, but it is really little and insignificant, but look back over here! THIS theory of evolution, though we do not know it as a factual theory, is very�� blah blah blah, and they keep going on to emphasize evolution while they importance of creationism. Parents, if Christian, DO have the responsibility to teach their kids about the origin of life according to creationism. But what about the kids whose parents don�t give a flip? The ones whose parents are atheist, lazy, or apathetic? Then where is the learning coming from. The kids hear this little theory of creationism, but even though evolution is being taught as not factual, these kids will absorb this theory into their heads and become all the more confused about the origin of life when evolution is disproved to them. And to clear up one thing: there is micro- and macroevolution. Micro is true. Macro is not. Micro-evolution is small change over time: a bird adjusting to its climate. Macro-evolution is species change. The complete evolving from one species to another. Micro evolution should not be called evolution � I prefer to dub it with the title of adaptation. Evolution is a word that so many people link with evolution and evolutionists� theory of Darwinism and survival of the fittest, that it is almost improper to label it with so deceptive a term. I believe that is where you get confused when you are talking about evolution. I agree completely with your cynical attitude in your last paragraph. Evolution is absurd in every way. What a contrast with creationism.

   Reply
9. Corey says:

   October 10, 2006 at 8:09 pm

   In regards to the orginal post, I would just like to make a few points. The first is that nobody in the scientific community would argue with you when you say that the theory of evolution is just that: A theory. However, they would be quick to point out that in the scientific world, a theory is the best thing you can have. A theory is a collection of many well tested hypothesis brought together by a common thread, supported by mountains of evidence and which provides a great deal of explanitory power. Nothing is ever "proven" in the scientific world. Gravity is not a proven fact, it is a theory (one which, by the way, changes quite a bit in detail over time as we learn more and more about the nature of matter). So to say that evolution is "just" a theory, is to completely misunderstand the meaning of "theory". I know that in grade school, teachers try to pass it off as fact. Teachers do this sort of thing alot for the sake of simplification (it is easier to just say something is fact than to explain what a hypothesis is and what theories are and how they are related). My grade one teacher told me that numbers started at 0 and then went to 1 and then to 2 etc. I now know that numbers have no starting point and they are not discrete. There are negative numbers, imaginary numbers, decimals and God only knows what else. My teacher was not remiss in her duties when she left this out, she was just trying to simplify things. Teachers do the same in science. They teach the predominant theories that you need to know and understand in order to proceed in your academic career and that is about it. This brings me to my second point. Intelligent design is not a useful hypothesis withing the scientific community and so learning about it cannot help you proceed in science. It is not a useful hypothesis for two main reasons. First- Because it tends to invoke either God or aliens, it is non-falsifyable (at least until such time as God or aliens start chatting it up with the scientists). This means it can never be proven wrong, and while scientists will never claim to have proven something right, they love to try and prove things wrong. You want to know if there is gravity? Drop a pencil. If it floats, gravity as we know it has been proven to be wrong (if it falls though, remember that gravity has not been proven right, it is just that a little move evidence now exists to support it). If the theory of gravity involved ghosts, then the pencil floating would not prove it wrong. Maybe the ghosts decided to lift up the pencil this time instead of guiding it to the ground. The theory would be non-falsifyable, therefore untestable and useless. Secondly- It doesn't have any significant explanitory power. The theory of evolution forms the basis of all biology today. You know all of those long complicated names biologists give to animals? They are given to animals based on where animals fall on the evolutionary tree. This was done this way because this provided an exceedingly useful and descriptive method of categorization for all creatures. Everything seems to fall somewhere on the tree (eg: each organism shares charactoristics of other organisms in a specific area of the tree and does not share any with organisms on the other side of the tree). Without somehow invoking evolutionary theory, it becomes impossible to speak intelligibly of biological systems and structures. The mechanisms of evolution may not be entirely known (the same may be said of gravity), but the explanitory power of the general principle of evolution is astounding (which is why you absolutely must learn about evolution if you are to proceed in Biology). Intelligent design offers none of this. It is simply unable to offer adequate accounts of observed phenomena (ie, testable accounts that explain lots of phenomena at once and don't rely on ghosts or God). So, evolution is, yes, a "theory" (like gravity). It is a theory which, even if not understood in it's entirety (like gravity), provides an exceptional amount of explanitory power and is one of the foundations of science today. Intelligent design is not a theory. It is a hypothesis; one that is untestable and which provides very little explanitory power. This is why it is not taught in schools. There is no time for things which do not help you understand things further down your academic path. It is the job of life long scholars to investigate the competing hypothesis within small subsets of science (Nobody looks at ALL the competing hypothesis in physics, there are just to many. An entire life could be devoted just to the study and understanding of string theory and that is just one of many theories regarding the nature of matter which is a small subset of topics in physics.) so if scholars think that intelligent design is worth investigating, they will do so and will compare it with the other competing hypothesis. In schools however, evolution is taught because it is a useful and widely accepted theory that will aid students in their academic careers. Intelligent design is none of this.

   Reply
10. Ron Anderson says:

    September 8, 2006 at 2:58 pm

    There is NO separation of church and state in the constitution. However, I do agree that religion is best taught at home and church and not from someone you have no clue as to what they believe.

    Reply
11. Dave Welsh says:

    September 6, 2006 at 9:11 am

    Indeed. It should either be that there is *no* discussion of origin theories in schools, or that proponents of different theories *all* get to put forth their theories and the evidence to support them. That the atheist viewpoint gets to be put forth in schools is a an unfair blending of one particular faith and the state.

    Reply