Evolution vs. Creation

[Redzeppelin]

I haven't seen one fair argument proving evolution wrong in this topic yet besides the comments where you say "bible is right...god inspired the writers...parables are fact...and so on". Let's hear a good argument debunking evolution. Come on, I want to hear it. Enough straw man; let's see some real debating that doesn't use "faith" as ammunition.

Have you not been paying attention to my posts? I've never set out to "debunk" evolution because, frankly, I can't. That doesn't hurt me to say, because the other side of the coin is you can't "debunk" my belief either: both are equally unprovable. I have simply asked the evolutionists to acknowledge the role that faith, uncertainty, and interpretation play out in evolution as well as creationism (which few evolutionists seem willing to do). You keep claiming "straw man" but you have not explained how I'm using such a tactic. Where am I setting up a weaker argument instead of dealing with the one at hand? Identify what it is you keep claiming to be victimized by.

[Wintermute]

[QUOTE=Redzeppelin;343133] That doesn't hurt me to say, because the other side of the coin is you can't "debunk" my belief either: both are equally unprovable. [QUOTE]

Hi Red,

I agree, that debunking someone's faith is not possible. By definition, as we've discussed elsewhere, faith implies 100% certainty. How is it possible to debunk 100% certainty?

But, I do think that evolution is more provable than an omnipotent creator, and that anthropologists are well on their way to doing so. I'm personally convinced. But not certain.

Just curious. Would certainty about human evolution diminsh your faith in any way? I hope not. To me, assuming a creator, evolution would be one of its most astounding creations.

Cheers.

Btw, I like your old avatar better, this one looks a lil'...staunch.

[Matrim Cuathon]

evolution has been proved as much as most other scientific theories...

[Adudaewen]

The bible is about FAITH. You can't compare faith with science. .

That is a good point. However, one can certainly counter that belief in evolution is based on faith as well. You put your faith in science, I put my faith in God.
To me, I think the idea that all life started from a single celled organism millions or billions of years ago would take a bit of faith on the part of the person who believes it. Humans have made leaps and bounds by acts of faith. Do you not believe that Copernicus or Einstein or any other of the thousands of founding fathers of science had only simple facts to lean on? Did they not have to depend on faith, to believe they were right when all of the scientific world believed they were madmen?
Now I think it is very important to clarify here that what I am talking about is macro evolution, evolution from one species to a new one. We see micro evolution every day, from the variety of breeds of dogs/cats to viruses that evolve as antivirals are introduced. There is a difference. I am not debating micro evolution, I am debating macro evolution. Perhaps I am "ignorant" when it comes to the science (faith) of evolution, yet I have seen enough evidence to tell me that evolutionists don't have an answer for everything. A lot of the missing link theories just don't make logical sense to me. A lizard turning into a bird is a leap of faith. One would think that the evolution process would never succeed for the simple reason that the links in between would be very vulnerable to attack from predators. And why can we not find a sufficient number of missing link fossils. If as many creature have totally evolved as what scientists are saying there would be millions of missing links. How many stages do you think it would take to turn a fish into a lizard or a lizard into a bird, or an ape into a human? Is that not a belief based on faith because we have never seen it with waking eyes?
Also I would bring up Nebraska Man. In 1922, geologists made an amazing discovery on the plains of Nebraska when they found several teeth they classified as being from an ape/human missing link they named Hesperopithecus haroldcookii. These scientists made several drawings of "Nebraska Man" and made depictions of a society of early human beings from this, declaring it to be "the" missing link. Only later would they find out that the tooth actually belonged to an extinct species of pig called peccary. That was enough to show me that believing in evolution is as much a leap of faith as believing in creation.
I am certainly not saying that by reading this post, someone is going to "see the light" and change their mind about evolution, just as I am not going to be easily swayed by arguments from an evolutionary standpoint. I am simply stating that though I do believe in creation, I am not an ignorant hick. I have studied and delved and learned and researched, and to me Creation makes a heck of a lot more sense than evolution. Just take that into consideration before you discount us as ignorant or pity us as fools.

[Matrim Cuathon]

in response to your examples about einstein and such, why would they need faith? they put the ideas out there, and if they were wrong, big deal. the said what the math and expirement stold them and if they got it wrong, well, science doesnt claim to know everything.

[Wintermute]

I am simply stating that though I do believe in creation, I am not an ignorant hick. I have studied and delved and learned and researched, and to me Creation makes a heck of a lot more sense than evolution. Just take that into consideration before you discount us as ignorant or pity us as fools.

Hi there Adu,

If you were an ignorant hick you wouldn't be here. All of your postings that I have read have been well written and loaded with compassion for everyone's points of view.

Do you consider evolutionary and creationist theories to be counter arguments to each other? I'm not sure that I do. It seems like evolution (on earth and elsewhere) could be an absolutely amazing idea of a universal, omnipotent creator. Now if we limit ourselves the a Christian creator, where earth-bound humans are the center of its (his) creation, then I can see how there may be room for disagreement.

[Redzeppelin]

Hi Red,

I agree, that debunking someone's faith is not possible. By definition, as we've discussed elsewhere, faith implies 100% certainty. How is it possible to debunk 100% certainty?

This may be a whole different thread, but I wonder how much we actually can be 100% certain of. Much of philosophy (especially after Descartes) deals with the issue of perception and reality - and I think that much of what we believe to be certain (especially that which we view through our eyes [the easiest of our 5 senses to fool]) is subject to the limits/distortions that perception (and bias) are prone to, as well as the necessary process of interpretation - which itself is prone to subjectivity (which Adudaewen's post nicely pointed out w/ the example of the Nebraska Man - well done Adudaewen! ).

But, I do think that evolution is more provable than an omnipotent creator, and that anthropologists are well on their way to doing so. I'm personally convinced. But not certain.

It has more observable "evidence" - but even that evidence is prone to the subjectivity/bias of interpretation (Nebraska Man!)

Just curious. Would certainty about human evolution diminsh your faith in any way? I hope not. To me, assuming a creator, evolution would be one of its most astounding creations.

No. It is possible that evolution was a tool God used. If the Bible is wrong in its rendition, or it spoke figuratively instead of literally, my faith is not shaken, because few (if any) people come to God because doing so makes logical, reasonable sense. CS Lewis himself - a staunch atheist prior to his conversion - called himself "the most reluctant convert," one who was dragged "kicking and screaming" into the faith. Christian thought is full of paradox - I'm not worried one bit.

Btw, I like your old avatar better, this one looks a lil'...staunch.

Thanks - in honor of all the Crusades "slamming" in the atheist thread, I've adopted the seal of the Knights Templar. "God wills it!"

evolution has been proved as much as most other scientific theories...

Sure - no argument there - it has been as proven as much as a theory probably can be proven. But a 90% proven theory is still a theory. (Please don't quibble on my percentage - I pulled it out of the air. If you wish to tell me that evolution is 99% proven [an incredible statement] I'll still respond that 1% of uncertainty is enough for me).

[hyperborean]

in honor of all the Crusades "slamming" in the atheist thread, I've adopted the seal of the Knights Templar. "God wills it!"

I'm sure an imaginary construct wants you to defend him

Crusades...people living and dying for God. Their philosophy went against everything the golden age of man promoted: living for their nation. Your avatar represents the downfall of man...nice.

[manolia]

However, one can certainly counter that belief in evolution is based on faith as well. You put your faith in science, I put my faith in God. .

No. Science has nothing to do with faith i'm afraid. Science has to do with indications. A scientist has a powerfull instrument in his hands which is called "experiment" with which one can ascertain if the indication one has are leading to a certain conclusion.
And talking about faith, one can't worship science. I really can't imagine myself worshipping concrete and steel (being a civil engineer).

To me, I think the idea that all life started from a single celled organism millions or billions of years ago would take a bit of faith on the part of the person who believes it..

Really then do tell me is it easier for one to believe instead that the universe which is immense -i think we agree on that- could have been actually created in a few days by a benevolent force and simply kept on going from day zero till today unchanged? I am not forming a particular opinion since i am clueless to the particulars concerning the origin of the universe and everything, but i believe that human, being small and insignificant, can't possibly know (find out) the answer to these questions. And i can't help but wonder at the assurance of God-believers that they know the answer to all those difficult questions (maybe this is the easy way ,to attribute all the things you can't understand to a Higher Power.)

Do you not believe that Copernicus or Einstein or any other of the thousands of founding fathers of science had only simple facts to lean on? Did they not have to depend on faith, to believe they were right when all of the scientific world believed they were madmen? ..

The fact that the contemporaries of Einstein could not comprehend his genius doen't prove anything. This often happens to superior people. They are often understood and aknowledged after death. And again i believe that it wasn't faith that kept Einstein going but merely observation of the natural enviroment, inspiration and at last experiments. Some will say that inspiration is divine..well i agree metaphorically speaking.

Now I think it is very important to clarify here that what I am talking about is macro evolution, evolution from one species to a new one. We see micro evolution every day, ..

I can't understand how can one partly accept the evolution proccess. Either you accept it either you don't. Either it is there either not. I have read your post several times in order to understand what you mean. If i have misunderstood please do enlighten me.

And why can we not find a sufficient number of missing link fossils. If as many creature have totally evolved as what scientists are saying there would be millions of missing links. ..

What about environmental and climatological changes? We all know about Ice Age, glaciers, volcanoe eruptions, basaltic flows, earthquakes and in sort we know that our beloved planet has undergone many changes since the beginning. I believe nobody disputes that. I think that pretty much explains that many species that (potentialy) walked (crawled whatever) the earth are irretrievably lost and not a single piece of them is ever to be found. In fact i believe that Palaiontologist are lucky to have found these they already have. Now imagine how many for example skeletons or remains of each known dinosaur we have. Just a few, when i believe there was a big number of each species once.

I live in a country full of ancient ruins. Many ancient cities are yet to be found. Archaiologists based on ancient texts (Homer ,Herodotos) are still trying to locate many of them a task which is very hard due to the afore mentioned changes. Now, these cities are relative young compared to the fossils we are talking!

I have been a silent viewer for a long time in this thread. Your post being decent, civil and well written tempted me to post my opinion in juxtaposition to yours. I hope you don't mind my doing that. As you can see i don't reject God. I just have my doubts in many things- not only concerning God of course. I hope you are in no way offended by what i write. If you are, i feel sorry in advance.

[Redzeppelin]

I'm sure an imaginary construct wants you to defend him

Ha - "imaginary" for now. We'll see.

Crusades...people living and dying for God. Their philosophy went against everything the golden age of man promoted: living for their nation. Your avatar represents the downfall of man...nice.

Oh stop. The politics behind the Crusades was suspect, but the philosophy and the performance of the Knights Templar in battle was unquestioned; even Saladin had great respect for these men. Find something else to do besides analyze my avatar. I know all the symbolism behind yours too, but consider such speculation a waste of time and not germane to the topic at hand. Argument, anyone?

[hyperborean]

Ok, going back to topic.

Well you say that believing in evolution is "faith" as well. Here's the problem. Any shred of physical evidence backing up evolution makes it more credible than creationism. Yes, there is some faith, but there is also physical evidence. Creationism is pure faith.

[Redzeppelin]

Ok, going back to topic.

Well you say that believing in evolution is "faith" as well. Here's the problem. Any shred of physical evidence backing up evolution makes it more credible than creationism. Yes, there is some faith, but there is also physical evidence. Creationism is pure faith.

Not at all. Christians think they have plenty of evidence for what they believe - but it is generally not evidence that evolutionist's take as credible. Your assertion that "any shred of physical evidence" makes a theory more credible is certainly true if one accepts that physical evidence is the ultimate proof of the "reality" of something. I contend that it is not always so. And, your "shred" of evidence may prove our point as well. That's what we call interpretation: you have yours and we have ours, and it's difficult to disprove interpretations based upon differing foundations/philosophies/mind-sets/biases. Because I don't have a picture of God creating the world, or His email address or a fossil of some sort, my position is deemed weaker than yours - because you have some observable clues that you've interpreted to mean what you'd like them to mean (I again refer to Nebraska Man - a perfect example of seeing what we wish to see in our evidence). We creationists believe that the incredible complexity of the human body is plenty of evidence that a creator is behind the real world. That our body "just happened" to develop the way it has is absurd. Complexity does not come out of simplicity or chaos. Our universe tends towards a decay, a simplification of material reality into its most basic forms. If I leave a car out in the desert, it will eventually turn to rust, dust and whatever base components it was made of: it will not proceed to develop into a more complex mode of transportation.

[Matrim Cuathon]

omg... you just stated so many (incorrect) opinions as fact. by its nature the universe tends towards complexity. you cant use cars as an example. if you leave life in a desert it adapts to live there more efficiently. i hate when christians use ridculous arguements like that. cars are not designed to do that. when you leave a plant in a desert, or a tree in the forest it grows. from a tiny seed.

[Stanislaw]

evolution has been proved as much as most other scientific theories...

um, thats more of an opinion...gravity has much more proof than evolution...so thats not true.

Hi there Adu,

If you were an ignorant hick you wouldn't be here. All of your postings that I have read have been well written and loaded with compassion for everyone's points of view.

Do you consider evolutionary and creationist theories to be counter arguments to each other? I'm not sure that I do. It seems like evolution (on earth and elsewhere) could be an absolutely amazing idea of a universal, omnipotent creator. Now if we limit ourselves the a Christian creator, where earth-bound humans are the center of its (his) creation, then I can see how there may be room for disagreement.

exactly! evolution doesn't prove that there is no god, something started it all...

I'm sure an imaginary construct wants you to defend him

Crusades...people living and dying for God. Their philosophy went against everything the golden age of man promoted: living for their nation. Your avatar represents the downfall of man...nice.

actually, I beleive the crusades were pre reneissance. Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori.

And the idea of the Templar was to fight for their belief, what they held as truth (well atleast in the idealistic idea, but the crusades were also a means of controlling the unruly gemranic knights, to focus their aggressions and to unite against a common enemy) but, the ideal is not far off from a secularistic ideal of the right to bare arms...

Ok, going back to topic.

Well you say that believing in evolution is "faith" as well. Here's the problem. Any shred of physical evidence backing up evolution makes it more credible than creationism. Yes, there is some faith, but there is also physical evidence. Creationism is pure faith.

well...evolution has a book as proof, creationism has a book as proof...

again, that is incorrect, you are avoiding any presented proofs for creationism...

[Matrim Cuathon]

its not a proof. anyone can recreate the data for evolution. no one can find out for themselves if the bible is true.