Evolution is no more science than Creationism is.

[Sunstone]

So you're for a government that dictates what can, and cannot be taught to children-a lot like fascist Germany.

Hi Luke! Welcome to the Forums! Please don't put words in my mouth, least I bite you.

You see, Hitler said, "Let me control the text books, and I will control the state." He also believed he was serving evolution by eliminating the Jews.

Did Hitler really say that? If so, where did he say that? Are you familiar enough with what your talking about to cite your sources?

My own hunch is that if Hitler thought he was serving evolution by killing Jews, then his understanding of evolution was no better than that of the average American Creationist. Of course, that's just my hunch.

 

[Sunstone]

Evolution does not fit the facts. From gravity to population: it is all out of proportion.

Are you avoiding the first question on purpose? To restate it: What is the science behind Creationism/Intelligent Design?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

So you're for a government that dictates what can, and cannot be taught to children-a lot like fascist Germany. You see, Hitler said, "Let me control the text books, and I will control the state." He also believed he was serving evolution by eliminating the Jews.

If some Church wants to teach this in Sunday school it is up to them, no one will stop them. That is a question of faith.

Our Schools are required to teach Science.

 

[Green Gaia]

I adhere to Kent Hovind's position on Evolution: teach it in the schools as one alternative for where we came from; but teach Creationism and I.D. too because it is no less "science" than Evolution is.

I say it's not science for several reasons: we have never observed or found sufficient evidence for: macro evolution, stellar evolution, organic evolution, chemical evolution, and cosmic evolution. The only type of evolution we have ever observed is Micro Evolution; that is the evolution within species. Another reason, though that last one is by far enough, is population. Those are just some reasons, though there are plenty, those are the biggest reasons I think.

We cannot know for certain where we came from, and when you ask an evolutionist what his position is, he says: "I believe..." -a religious statement. So in the end evolution is just as much a religion as Creationism, or I.D. is.

Which creation myth/story are you going to teach to kids as fact in school?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I say it's not science for several reasons: we have never observed or found sufficient evidence for: macro evolution, stellar evolution, organic evolution, chemical evolution, and cosmic evolution. The only type of evolution we have ever observed is Micro Evolution;

I would not say that I have a chair that evolves into a Bed
And better still it can revert to a chair.

stellar evolution, organic evolution, chemical evolution, and cosmic evolution
What ridiculous examples.
There is no such thing as these, any more than there is air evolution.
Such things may change as a reaction, but nor evolve.

Your mind is truly in danger of being messed up by these ideas.

 

[wizanda]

Void = Random Quantum fields
Adam = Atom
Eve = breath of life, or quantum energy within an atom to animates it
El = God
Elohim = Reflections of the one true God, to make earth (dream walkers, Elders, Ascended masters etc)
Apples = Alcohol = produces ego and causes unwanted desires and lust + makes us fall consciously
+ more…………. if spend time thinking, yet they are some that actually translate also.

 

[UnTheist]

Evolution = observed millions of times

Intelligent Design = observed 0 times.

The debate is over.

 

[Charles]

For instance, from a spiritual perspective one (individual) plus one (god) equals one.
Edit: (though I haven't tested that one yet)

You don't have to, you exist.

You are so right, the way that we human beings look at evolution and creation is from what we know (through education) or what we may have seen (through experience),
my point being is we are very young on the Intelligent evolutionary stage, both spiritual and physical. They say they have found 200 planets in the last couple of years using the telescopic wobble method. Out of that, the one most recent, could possibly have life. But this is only a tiny fraction of the cosmos. If we found a planet that had gone through possibly the same sort of evolution that we possibly have and yet were on a small universal time scale, of say 80,000 earth years more advanced than we were, blimey, that would be something else. It is where we also look at biological life from our perspective, other parts of the cosmos, you may even have different gases in certain star systems, so you could easily have inelligent life in different forms. Size is also another factor that does not really fall into any equation when it comes to intelligence. Just on earth, Study a fly, watch it clean its wings and its back legs, study an elephant cooling its back with water from its trunk. We were born with the gift of voicebox and hands and feet with a more advanced brain, being God's finest creation on earth yet, i'm sure that could change.As Humans we are young, but as Willamena says, we should always, without doubt, keep our hearts and understanding open to Intelligence, whether on the evolution or creation front, the Universe itself is very old, to keep ones mind open, is a must.

 

[Luke_17:2]

Hi Luke! Welcome to the Forums! Please don't put words in my mouth, least I bite you.

Thank you for the welcome. Forgive me, but that's how I took it. I have a bad habit of mininterpretation.

Did Hitler really say that? If so, where did he say that? Are you familiar enough with what your talking about to cite your sources?

It would be much easier if you googled it: it will come up right on top, and will dominate the page.

My own hunch is that if Hitler thought he was serving evolution by killing Jews, then his understanding of evolution was no better than that of the average American Creationist. Of course, that's just my hunch.

Well, according to the name of Darwin's book, "The Origin of Species by Means of natural selection", Hitler wasn't far off in principle at least

We've been dancing around the subject. Until now, we've been quibling, and coming close, but not actually debating evolution vs. creationism.

 

[fantome profane]

No, I mean the Law of Gravity. When Newton discovered it, he called it the Law of Gravity; it was only changed to Theory of Gravity 40 years ago to help evolution.

That is also a definition, but it doesn't apply to the Law of Gravity because we know how gravity works; it doesn't require an explanation. As opposed to the origins of everything we see today: it requires an explanation. We have a couple religion that attempt to explain it; we might go so far as to call them religious theories.

Gravity actually is a “Law” and a “Theory”, that is to say there is the “Law of Gravity” and there is the “Theory of Gravity” (or actually several different competing theories).

You have already stated the “Law of gravity” (F = G M1M2/R2). When we say this is a “Law”, what we mean is that it is a mathematical description of our observations. It is not an absolute truth; it is simply a useful equation. If we should find that this equation does not match our observations of nature, the equation can be changed.

The Theory of Gravity is an attempt to explain how gravity works; not just what happens, but how it happens. What is the mechanism behind it? Many people are unaware of just how complicated gravity actually is. Is Gravity a “field”? And what is a “field”? Is Gravity caused by particles called “gravitons”? How can gravity affect things instantaneously over any distance? What is “quantum gravity”? What does super-string theory tell us about gravity?

It is fortunate for us that many scientists do not agree with you that gravity “doesn't require an explanation” and are diligently working to try to find an explanation, to understand the phenomenon of gravity. If they thought like you then there would be no more progress in this area.

There are even those who believe that there must be a “supernatural” or “divine” explanation for gravity. There are those who believe that gravity is caused by the divine will of a higher intelligence (“God”?). And they argue that the theory of gravity is only a “theory”, and one that “cannot find a way to make Einstein's general relativity match up with the subatomic quantum world”. And for this reason they will argue that students in the science classroom should be taught both alternatives to gravity.


Evolution, like gravity, is also a theory and a fact. For example very few biologists will question the fact the humans and chimpanzees have evolved from a common ancestory. The “theory” part comes in only when whe are attempting to explain how this happened. Natural selection is one theory that explains how evolution happened. Although there are some very interesting debates currently going on withing the field of biological evolution, Natural selection in general is considered an extremely well proven theory and is widely accepted in the scientific communtiy. By comparison the theory of gravity is much more speculative.

 

[Luke_17:2]

Are you avoiding the first question on purpose? To restate it: What is the science behind Creationism/Intelligent Design?

I answered the post, but I must have missed the question. There is population. The current population can be counted back to about 4500 years ago. If there was 50,000 years of modern humans, there would be far more the 6 billion people. And as it is, we there is only 6,000 years of recorded human civilization-it just happens to correspond with the date of Creation (the start of the Hebrew calendar). There is the half-life of 1400 years. At the end of every 1400 years the Earth's atmosphere has weakened by 1/2. And if the Earth is 4.5 billion years old than the Earth would have imploded under its own weight. As it is, 6,000 years ago the atmosphere's strength would have been more than quadruple what it is now.

 

[wizanda]

Newton invented Cider, which then made us fall even more = Gravity


Yet this all started with He-brew…good 'Job' Yeshua said only drink water, else there might be millions falling and making their own gravity………:angel2:

 

[Luke_17:2]

stellar evolution, organic evolution, chemical evolution, and cosmic evolution
What ridiculous examples.

You're not even informed about your own religion! Look them up in the dictionary, and you'll find that they indeed do exist.

Stellar evolution=The evolution, and formation of stars
Cosmic evolution= The evolution of matter (Big Bang)
Chemical evolution=The evolution of chemicals following the Big Bang
Organic Evolution=The evolution of life (living things)
Macro Evolution=The evolution from one species to another
Micro Evolution=The evolution within species (We have observed this one)

 

[Luke_17:2]

Evolution = observed millions of times

Indeed? Macro Evolution has never been obsered. Have we ever observed a monkey turn into a human? Have we ever observed a rat become a cat?

What about Stellar evolution? We have never observed a star being formed. Of course that doesn't mean that it hasn't happened, but we've never observed it, and that is the issue in question.

For chemical evolution: we have never observed one chemical spontaneously turn into another, nor have we seen it happen gradually.

Organic evolution is a direct contradiction to II Law of Thermodynamics: all matter tends toward chaos. Humans die: al life dies. The sun is dying. The Earth is dying. Evolution itself is in contradiction of that law.

We have no proof that the Big Bang ever happened. Logic would suggest that there would be a central part of the galaxy similar to that of a galactic core. Though we may yet learn of one, we've never found one, and until we do, there is no proof. And the matter that caused the Big Bang: where did it come from?

As I said, Micro evolution has been observed, and can be performed. It is the same as breeding two dogs to get a better dog.

 

[Luke_17:2]

Evolution, like gravity, is also a theory and a fact. For example very few biologists will question the fact the humans and chimpanzees have evolved from a common ancestory. The “theory” part comes in only when whe are attempting to explain how this happened. Natural selection is one theory that explains how evolution happened. Although there are some very interesting debates currently going on withing the field of biological evolution, Natural selection in general is considered an extremely well proven theory and is widely accepted in the scientific communtiy. By comparison the theory of gravity is much more speculative.

A theory and a fact, eh? We are agreed about when the theory part comes in, and evolution is just that: a theory (and after the way it's been disproven, it's become more of a religion). The fact in this scenario is this: life exists. The theories to explain it are these: Creationism, I.D., and Evolution. The ways Evolution has been disproven are numerous enough, but the discredit it has been able absorb without any attention is a miracle in and of itself.

 

[Luke_17:2]

Which creation myth/story are you going to teach to kids as fact in school?

Well, certainly not the one that says something exploded from nothing 15 billion years ago.

 

[McBell]

I answered the post, but I must have missed the question. There is population. The current population can be counted back to about 4500 years ago. If there was 50,000 years of modern humans, there would be far more the 6 billion people. And as it is, we there is only 6,000 years of recorded human civilization-it just happens to correspond with the date of Creation (the start of the Hebrew calendar). There is the half-life of 1400 years. At the end of every 1400 years the Earth's atmosphere has weakened by 1/2. And if the Earth is 4.5 billion years old than the Earth would have imploded under its own weight. As it is, 6,000 years ago the atmosphere's strength would have been more than quadruple what it is now.

This isn't science any more than this is:

Scientists have shown that the moon is moving away at a tiny, although
measurable distance from the earth every year. If you do the math, you
can calculate that 85 million years ago the moon was orbiting the
earth at a distance of about 35 feet. This would explain the death of
the dinosaurs... the tallest ones, anyway.
​

Creationism/ID is about the beginning of life.
Evolution is not about the beginning of life, it is about the way life changed after it began.

And you still have not explained how creationism/ID is science.

 

[Green Gaia]

Well, certainly not the one that says something exploded from nothing 15 billion years ago.

That's not an answer. Which religion's would you force on my children in public school?

 

[McBell]

Indeed? Macro Evolution has never been obsered. Have we ever observed a monkey turn into a human? Have we ever observed a rat become a cat?

And right here you have shown you know practically nothing about evolution.
You are in great need of learning about this subject.

Or are you merely pulling a Hovind tactic of relying upon the ignorance of others?


Either way it matters not.
For I am done in this thread.

 

[Luke_17:2]

This isn't science any more than this is:

Scientists have shown that the moon is moving away at a tiny, although
measurable distance from the earth every year. If you do the math, you
can calculate that 85 million years ago the moon was orbiting the
earth at a distance of about 35 feet. This would explain the death of
the dinosaurs... the tallest ones, anyway.

Why, thank you for bringing that up. I must have missed that one!

And how can you say that it's not science? Mathematics is the most irrefutable science in existence. Not only is it Science, it makes Chemistry look like a fairytale!

And you still have not explained how creationism/ID is science.

Okay, now I'm angry. I've made it clear numerous times in this thread that I'm aware that Creationism is only a religion, but that evolution is not at all better. Look at the title of the thread; do you need any more assurance? My point here is that Evolution is no more science than Creationism is: at best it's a dying theory; at worst it's a dying religion.