Joined: 1-March 05
Member No.: 8,849
I've heard rants and raves about this subject on other forums, so I figured I'd bring the disease here. Please, though:
If you want to argue a point, don't turn this into a flame war. Seriously, just look at philosophy, facts, etc. NOT who has the better insults.
Just to make things clear: I'm for the Creation side of this, and yes I know, there's also an Intelligent Design part arising among scientists. However, I see this as a half-assed attempt to say 'We were created... but not by God.'
I put it in the polls, though, just in case.
So vote, then speak your piece!
Edited and added poll choices. March 25, 2011. ~Tombow
Joined: 4-December 04
From: Somewhere new that makes me better than you
Member No.: 3,228
QUOTE(What @ no bacon?,Mar 9 2005, 02:29 PM)
Evolution isn't an airtight theory, but it makes a whole hell of a lot more sense than anything scripture has to offer.
This is about it for scientists and the typical person who's been raised on scientific methods. Evolution simply is the most reasonable empirical explanation. Does it mean it's right - no, but it does mean that it's rational to believe.
Creationism is a faith based belief system. Is it irrational - no. It's not irrational because of the fact that scientific theories are not necessarily always true. It's always possible that the universe puffed into existence as it stands today. Basically all scientific attempts at a cosmology assume that the laws that we know about today have existed since the beginning of the universe. It's entirely possible for it not to.
What's the result? Whatever your belief system, respect evolution as a reasonable explanation of why things are the way they are. But, if you're an evolutionist, don't be so high and mighty to put down the creationist. Macro-evolution in itself is quite contrary to normal scientific laws (entropy is not followed and usually involves some type of external intervention).
QUOTE(Guest @ Mar 9 2005, 11:33 PM)
What really is the point of arguing over this thing? Clearly we all know what we think and what the other side thinks and no one's about to change their mind. Those who believe in God will always believe in God and those who don't will never do no matter how convincing the other side's facts are.
Cause we're all open-minded like that.
The point of these debates is to show that it isn't irrational to believe one over the other. Of course we won't convince the other person, but those who watch on the sidelines may be convinced. At the very least, we must show that each side deserves respect. If one view is completely irrational, then it will not withstand the criticisms and people will see that.
It's also fundamental to ask these questions and challenge our own beliefs. To do that, we must see the contrary belief and determine whether our beliefs can withstand the scrutiny of argument.
For what I believe - I am not convinced by macro evolutionary theory. Something outside the current laws recognized by science are required to actually make evolution happen. Based on current laws, it's more reasonable to imagine that the word was more complex and will degrade into single cell organisms (looking at teenagers these days, I'm starting to believe this more and more ). I am not, however, prepared to say that I can prove that the world was created by God, but I will say that I believe by faith that it was. Before you criticise whether faith is rational, please note that it is quite legitimate for one to argue that only by faith do you even know that your own body exists (that there is a physical world) and as such it is by faith that we believe anything science says . It's too bad that I'm feeling lazy now, or I'd go further into thought on this.