Cration Vs. Evolution

[wrath99]

It has always been my stand point that Evolution is the key contender when it comes to talking about the origins of life. because to me something can not be true unless proven with solid evidence.

God, Or his Supposed True Name Yahweh(i think that's how it is spellt in English) Can not be proven, which leads me to stray away from the religious notion of Creation. Now on the other hand Evolution, we can see in our every day life, with evolution of how we think, how we act, and from each generation of children we produce, small evolutionary changes occur. With the Darwin study, Evolution occurs in different areas in different ways, such as Birds of the Same Geno-logical strain use different methods of obtaining food, Some of the same insects use different methods of hiding from prey.

All of these things, to me prove evolution to be true, and keeps, on a daily basis, disproving Religion.


Now a little back ground to my self, i have studied, Judaism, Catholicism, Christianity, and Muslim. i know the words of each one, and i have disproved each one. i also Have done extensive research on Secret orders, such as the Knights Templar, illuminate(they may or may not exist), and the Free masons guild.

now, Discuss your thoughts

[Mind-Designers]

Well i believe in Evolution because i not believe in GOD and that is it

[wrath99]

well to me there can not be a god, seeing as no one has seen him, he is not in fact tangible a touchable object. he is more of a figment of the mind in the literal sense.

now then of course creation by big bang can not be explained either cause were d the first atom come from

[farscapeone]

Why does everybody narrow this topic to two choices? Don't you think that there is another possibility? Maybe it's a mix of those two. Just think about it.

On the other hand, there is no solid evidence of evolution neither. The theory relies on spontaneous chemical reaction that lead to creation of life. How can you prove that? But you can prove evolution process (and they did). Maybe god created it and made evolution possible.

I don't believe in "God" or any other religious figure because I think that religion is far more deeper and complex that that. It's not all like it seams it is. All figures represent something and they actually don't have to real persons. They could be ideas represented as persons so we could understand them better.

I don't believe in "God" as church represents and I also don't believe that life is a spontaneous chemical reaction made form chaos.

The fact is that we are currently not intelligent enough to understand it and the truth is that, right know, we don't have an answer.

[wrath99]

Why does everybody narrow this topic to two choices? Don't you think that there is another possibility? Maybe it's a mix of those two. Just think about it.

On the other hand, there is no solid evidence of evolution neither. The theory relies on spontaneous chemical reaction that lead to creation of life. How can you prove that? But you can prove evolution process (and they did). Maybe god created it and made evolution possible.

I don't believe in "God" or any other religious figure because I think that religion is far more deeper and complex that that. It's not all like it seams it is. All figures represent something and they actually don't have to real persons. They could be ideas represented as persons so we could understand them better.

I don't believe in "God" as church represents and I also don't believe that life is a spontaneous chemical reaction made form chaos.

The fact is that we are currently not intelligent enough to understand it and the truth is that, right know, we don't have an answer.

your point well taken, evolution can not be truly Proven, nor can Creation, me i am an agnostic, meaning i do know know what to believe but i know there is something.

Everything that comes and goes is always controlled by another force, always, that force is controlled by another and so on.

Evolution is the basis that all things are created with the inaint need to survive and renew ones self to be better for the environment that it is put into.

Creation on the other hand is put on the basis that all things are pre-destined to do one thing and can not change except for the need to accomplish that one specific goal set to them by the "Creator"

[deltavolt]

1) Evolution is SCIENTIFIC theory which means it has a lot going for it, it can be proven. Gravity is also a SCIENTIFIC THEORY, does that mean it cannot be proven? Anyone who says Evolution has nothing going for it should jump out of an airplane without a parachute, after all gravity's nothing but a theory too, right? =P

2) This is very important. Evolution is not a theory on origins and has nothing to say on how life began. It doesn't care about anything that happened pre-biological mutations.

[truthguild]

it always amazes me that people still argue this issue.
the theory of evolution has withstood the toughest scientific scrutiny for over 150 years, and is still going strong. every bit of evidence we ever uncover perfectly supports it.
creationism doesn't even qualify as a theory as there is no evidence for it, it makes no testable predictions, it is not falsifiable, and doesn't actually explain anything.

[farscapeone]

These two theory are two completely different things and you can't compare them in any possible way. Creation theory (religious one) talks about creation and evolution theory is everything after the creation. There are scientific theories about creation (big bang is currently most popular one) but there are no solid proofs for it, just like there is no proof of religious creation theory.

Creation is one thing and evolution is completely different one. Evolution is what happen after creation.

This thread has no meaning cos it compares two completely different things.

[truthguild]

These two theory are two completely different things and you can't compare them in any possible way. Creation theory (religious one) talks about creation and evolution theory is everything after the creation. There are scientific theories about creation (big bang is currently most popular one) but there are no solid proofs for it, just like there is no proof of religious creation theory.

Creation is one thing and evolution is completely different one. Evolution is what happen after creation.

This thread has no meaning cos it compares two completely different things.

but as i already mentioned, creationism isn't a theory - it's blatant speculation asserted as if it were a theory. there is no positive evidence for it, it's not testable, it makes no predictions, and it's not falsifiable.
regarding big bang theory, there's plenty of evidence supporting it such as large scale homogeniety, the hubble diagram, abundances of light elements, existence of the cosmic microwave background radiation, fluctuations in the CMBR, large-scale structure of the universe, age of stars, development of galaxies, time dilation in supernova brightness curves, tolman tests, sunyaev-zel'dovich effect, the integrated sachs-wolfe effect - to name a few.

[farscapeone]

Guess we'll see that theory if people in CERN (including my sister ) successfully finish their project ;)