Why we need Creationism

Define what you think Creationism is.

Heh, you're such a dick.

I agree.

To Eregion: the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe were created in their original form by some all-powerful deity or group of deities?

Then sdfu and come up with something constructive. lol

I agree. I don't believe Creationism should be taught in schools, and I do believe it is entirely unprovable using scientific concepts. What I meant to focus on was the criticism of Evolutionary concepts which have been raised by Creationists and then promptly ignored by the scientific community. The arguments should be evaluated by their own merits, not by the perceived idiotic beliefs of the person who came up with them.

And the reason I don't think Evolution is possible is because, well, it's impossible.

Go study some genetics.

I'm in a genetics and evolution class right now and it all seems VERY easy to understand.

1. Species has set amount of genes and DNA that allow them to adapt to their environment.
2. Environment changes.
3. Species with DNA that allows them to better adapt to environment survive, several others die off.
4. ^ That is Evolution.

It is the reason that there are many species today that all mutated(yes, believe it or not evolution is nothing more than mutation of genes and DNA over a veeeery long period of time) from some basic organism billions of years(NOT FIVE THOUSAND) ago. Genes control your traits, and humanity simply has more than anything else. 30,000 pairs of genes, all of which come from your mother and father and get all mixed up and then turn into you. When you are born, you don't magically appear inside your mom, your father's sperm and your mother's egg combine to complete the genome, which is filled with instructions for your cells to begin construction of... well... you!

Agreed. Evolution is true, in some ways. Given time, you'll find a mutation in a gene which actually benefits the creature, and, after "survival of the fittest," they may reproduce to a degree where that creature's gene is the most dominant of all creatures.

Now, does that explain the marvels of the universe and disprove creationism? Heyll no. I highly doubt chance (which is behind the whole theory of evolution if you think of it) created us, created the animals that some it's inner workings are still foreign to us, and created the infinite universe with wonders scientifically unexplainable to man.

..Except, of course, a few particles floating around, combining, creating an explosion, which made humans today.

Yes, it's a fairytale to you.
-- But only because you're not thinking broad enough; you can't perceive something beyond a tangible being.

The concept and nature of something divine exists beyond our comfort-zone.
You have to take a risk - in other words: have faith - in order to believe it.

You can't "touch" gravity; "see" gravity; "hear" gravity... But it's there.
Similar to the concept of a divine being and, in your case, Evolution. Your argument can apply to both sides.

The concept of creationism doesn't necessarily involve the Christian God.
It is a belief in a design - but a design that originates beyond our exact knowledge.

Example: When you see an object, you can say it evolved from a simpler object over millions of years, after a mysterious spontanious event supported it's existence [Evolution] or you could say it has a designer; someone or something that is or was consciously responsible for it's existence [Creationism].

The reason why Creationism can coincide with a belief in Evolution is because they argue on different levels.

In otherwords: Evolution is an incomplete argument in comparison to Creationism.
How did Evolution start? Why was Evolution possible? The answer to those questions would provide an answer that would be of equal scale to Creationism. Evolution can argue Religion because Religion is an extension of Creationism, but it can't argue Creationism alone.

Microevolution; easily understandable and obvious all around us.
Macroevolution; an improbable "fairy-tale" in the face of genetics.

I could be wrong, so correct me if I am, but I understood that the "slow changes over long periods of time" theory is impossible given our current understanding of genetics. No matter how long you wait there's no tangible proof that a frog can turn into a gorilla - with mountains of evidence against it (CALLED GENETICS).

The reason the mutation theory was contrived was to explain the introduction of inexplicable, instant change within one species which would incontrovertibly give rise to another (not necessarily creating a new species on the spot, but giving the ground-work for one). Again, there's no evidence for this, it's simply a working hypothesis given the parameters required by Evolutionary theory.

Therefore, whenever I see "over a veeeery long period of time" and "mutation" in the same sentence I get this twitchy, giggling feeling. Am I wrong? This is exactly my point though, no matter if Creationism is right or wrong, it gives an outside perspective on things which people take for granted but are fundamentally flawed because they ARE NOT FACT. They might be reasonable, but mistaking "that makes sense" with "that's infallibly correct" is like, dumb.

Wrong, you can feel gravity. If there were no gravity, you would be floating away right now. Humans have just gotten used to feeling gravity, seeing as how we have felt it from birth.


All it comes down to is humans being egocentric. We think that there is no possible way an intelligent and complex being such as ourselves could just evolve out of primitive beings. We must be a divine creation. Well, here's some food for thought: If we are divine creations, don't you think we would be a little more...capable? I mean, human bodies are fairly weak. We are prone to disease and viruses. We have an advanced mind, but so do many other animals, such as dolphins and various species of monkeys. There's nothing real special about us at all, except for our ingenuity and willingness to kill ourselves.

God is basically there to fill in the holes left from the scientific community. But, fortunately, science is starting to close those holes. God is only being used to describe the indescribable, and to answer the unanswerable. But soon, science will have such a complete argument that creationists will have no choice but to succumb to the overwhelming amount of evidence presented by the scientific community.


Check and mate.

My name is Christian Rose. Nice to meet you.

Gravity doesn't exist; it's an attempt to define the relationship of two objects of mass with each other, but since we don't know enough about gravity to say what it is or is not, our concept of "gravity" is subliminally flawed. Therefore, the definition is erroneous, and is only being used until a better alternative arises. Claiming gravity is an inherent truth is, fundamentally, flawed.

There IS something decidedly unique about humans, regardless of what you believe. I've never seen a dolphin try to build a sub-oceanic skyscraper; there's something inherently DIFFERENT about us that drives us while animals just continue being whatever they are, indefinitely.

Gorillas do not make airplanes, and they never will.

Sounds a bit like gravity. "We have absolutely no conceivable explanation of why this happens or how it works, but this is what we're going to call it until further notice." Except we think differently. I believe God created everything, and science is giving us the specifics (for example, God created dogs, and science is telling us why we have so many different species of dogs around today). Rather than saying "until we know otherwise, God did it in the Conservatory with a candlestick."

I don't expect you to believe my argument, just trying to explain what I think. I'll give the Evolutionary theory more credence if someone can show genetically how a mouse can turn into a moose; mutations are as much of an excuse for the inexplicable as you claim God to be since we don't have any proof of those either.

In fact, if we're going to deal in egocentric arguments, Evolution should be at the top of the list. We're claiming that the ("incapable") human race is able to determine events which took place countless years ago using nothing but deductive reasoning and common sense. No matter where you go with that argument you're screwed.

That is not exactly what I meant by what kind of creationist you are. There are plenty of Christians who believe in evolution in some form or another.

Here, ill give some rough categories of different kinds of creationism.

Strict Biblical - believes in strict interpretation of bible creationism, and ignores scientific evidence of creationism and historical evidence that runs contrary to biblical creationism.

Non-Abrahamic Creationism - Other creation myths derived from non-Abrahamic religions (not Judaism, Christianity, or Islam) and other creation myths. Too various to go into detail.

Intelligent Designer - Some hybrid of evolution and creationism that believes that moderate mutation is possible, but does not explain (as Eregon said) how complex life and evolution into entirely different species is possible without God as a designer. Thinks that god intervened to create various species, as evidenced by lack of plausibility of evolutionary theory. Eregon would be an intelligent designer.

God as the Spark of Life - First of all, it should be noted that almost all intelligent designers also hold this view, however it is possible to hold this view and at the same time reject intelligent design. This view basically says that life cannot create itself, but rather god needed to intervene to create life. People of this view also might even say that god is in all forms of life.

God as a Clockmaker - Often espoused by Diest thinkers, that god created the universe, but pretty much let things run their course. In other words god created the mechanisms for evolution itself, but did not directly create species. Accepts evolution as a valid and correct theory, but attributes evolution itself as a creation of god.

God as the Predestine - Goes one step further than the "Clockmaker" belief, in not only did god create the universe and mechanisms, but also predetermined its course. This view generally holds that the principles of evolution are sound, and that god did not actually "create" species, but rather the course of life was predestined so that the forces of evolution would eventually lead to humans. Rather than reject evolution as contrary to religion, those of this view see evolution as part of the inner workings of God's plan. Those of this view also might criticize the faith of intelligent designers for thinking that god needs to be so blatant as to "create" things, but rather since he is all powerful all he needs to do is will something to happen and it will happen even if it is through entirely natural and scientifically explainable means. Infact, they might argue that it makes sense that God would work in this way, because if God simply proved itself by creating things then there would be no point in having faith. This is a very interesting view because it synthesizes science and religion in such a way that they are mutually supporting, much to the annoyance of both religious and scientific dogmatists.

Aliens! - There are really two forms of this view, one stating that aliens directly intervened in creating life, and the other that asteroids containing basic alien forms of life crashed into earth and started life on earth. The later has actually gained some plausibility in the scientific community, but then the question still remains where did the alien life forms come from.

Human Anomaly - Believes in basic principles of evolution, except when it comes to humans being descendant from Apes. This view holds that evolution and a survival-of the-fittest model cannot explain the development of humans with higher reasoning skills and things such as arts, culture, and religion. In other words, humans have many attributes that are superfluous to survival, thus humans are an anomaly that can only be explained by the intervention of a higher power in our creation.

Agnostic Creationist - Thinks that the creation of the universe and development of life was somehow guided by a higher power, although as to what that power is remains uncertain. This is evidenced by several coincidences and conditions that are necessary life, that just seem to be too coincidental to have occurred by chance. Accepts the principles of evolution, but does not think that the creation of the universe and life were random.

If I have missed any of the other view of creationism please let me know, but I think this is pretty extensive and most people will find they fit into one of these categories if they are a creationist.

Personally, I am an Agnostic Creationist, but I have sympathies for others of creationist views (such as God as the Predestine) that reject pseudo-science.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

I'm tempted to give up my position just for the sake of diving headfirst into big-bang theory. IT LOOKS LIKE SO MUCH FUN! Heck, maybe I'll research it anyway sometime. I might not believe its happened, but the theory part is cool.

Religion is faith. Yet.. athiests continue to try to force their opinions onto us.

We do have a right to believe in what we want.

Ive never seen a minister attack Bill Mahr, or any other athiest. The fact is, we may seem idiotic to you, but in reality you seem idiotic to us. Various athiests try press their views into us, by calling us idiots, by trying to make us ashamed of what we believe in. If we dont believe in God who do we believe in? put all of our faith into a scientist? a senator? a president?

Why must you put faith in anything but yourself?

No "solid evidence" exists. There are very strong interpretations based on theory and our current understanding of science and basic reality, but we'll never really be able to prove any of them definitively without a time machine. That's what makes it all so much fun! It's like the ultimate detective novel; even if you're right, you'll never be able to prove it implicitly.

Scientists can prove what they wrote down.

Scientists have proof.

They also don't believe in giant invisible men in the sky.

+11111111111

Scientists have the scientific method. A series of thoughts and tests that prove something into law. They base these ideas on logic and reason, as well as existing proof.

Religion has, as you said, stories that someone wrote down thousands of years ago and the idea of an invisible man in the sky.

they have theories.

Instead of believing in an "invisible man" you believe in an invisible force and accept what another man said is true. Evolution is no different than Faith.

You keep skipping over the part where scientists have proof.


Creationism isn't even a theory. A theory is capable of being tested using scientific methods, and can be deemed a fact through empirical observation. The key to being a theory, is testability. If there's no way of testing it, then it's just random bullshit that you can choose to believe..or not..which is basically what religion is, no?

So you are wrong, belief in evolution and belief in creationism are two very different things.

no they're not.

They aren't proven.

We were not alive 65 million years ago we can find bones and THINK that they adapted/evolved into another animal but what about the animals inbetween? What about the Skeletons inbetween?


Tell me how you're going to test evolution.



Evolution is the same square Creationism is.

Anyone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's the whole premise of modern Evolutionary theory. Missing links don't exist, so it's obvious that species spectacularly came into existence through genetic mutation. This is a fascinating theory based on the fact that they can't find any missing links and has no evidence that I know of to back it up. Evolution of plant life would be an interesting topic of an essay, you never hear about it.

// edit //

What's even more funny to me is however much Evolutionists decry intelligent design as absurd, they can't help but rely on it themselves because God knows they can't explain things any other way:

"[Plants] invented the cuticle (to keep water in), [because] algae live in water. [They also] invented ... stoma (to allow gasses such as CO2 and O2 in and out through the cuticle)."

Then they spend entire lectures explaining how "drastic climate change" caused unspecified and highly theoretical changes in Earth's history, not because of evidence but because for their theories to WORK they need these things to have happened, so they damn well must have happened! But when Creationists talk about one tiny world-wide flood and they're like "DEAR GOD MAN HAVE YOU TAKEN LEAVE OF YOUR SENSES? JUST BECAUSE THERE'S EVIDENCE FOR IT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S TRUE! RECANT RECANT RECANT!"

LOL! I WAS JUST GOING TO POST THAT!!

Thanks for posting a link to a lung fish. Tiktaalik isn't anything new, there's at least six species alive today that you can go catch. Evolutionary theory relates similarities between animals in an attempt to trace their relationships and affairs throughout history based on the general assumption that they must all be related. If you drop the assumption that they're all related, all you've got left are similarities! Incredible w00t.

Assumptions are probably what annoy me the most about Evolution, but w/e.

Isn't creationism ALL ABOUT just assuming some supreme being created everything?

I like you.

Evolution: The compression of billions of man hours, and lives of scientists trying to find out how we became what we are, where we came from. Taught in schools, backed up by the scientific method.

Creationism: Some story in a book written by something or someone 2000 years ago about some invisible dude in the sky.

K.

The end.

..Who have absolutely no proof to back it up.

Creationism.

Its a book. Based on imaginary things.

Its a fairy tale, deal with it.

What I believe in is called "faith". ANd I accept that.


What you believe in, is almost exactly the same concept, for which you ridicule us.

You actually think you have proof.

There are planes and boats leaving everyday.

www.priceline.com

www.hotwire.com

That's a 'religion', Moch; they're not neccesarily the same thing.
Seperate beliefs can originate from the same basic principle. Creationism establishes the grounds for religion.

If you're going to ridicule us, you should probably do it right.

Yep. You're right, it IS.

Basically, the difference between creationists and evolutionists is that creationists have the flexibility of admitting that they rely on assumptions, while evolutionists generally seem to have already figured "it" out. In otherwords: they've traveled to another dimension and saw that there was no god there.

Evolution doesn't contradict Creationism; Atheism does.
[note: It could be logically valid to believe both that a being created an organism and that it evolves]
This thread, however, has turned into an atheist versus creationist debate, so my use of the word 'evolutionist' loosely includes atheists as well.





... Seriously, I don't think you can disprove the existence of God. If you understand the concept, you may be inclined to believe that it's virtually impossible -- even if one doesn't exist.



Creationists are stubborn little bastards, aren't we?

was trying to say that but couldn't find the words thank you

Yes. Basically it comes down to this: I don't know and neither do you.

Neither side can disprove the other...yet..

it is impossible to disprove the existance of an all powerful, all seeing entity. No matter who you are.

Indeed, just as it is impossible to prove such a being exists.

so here we are.

+1

Im in favor of intelligent design because I just think that there was far too much chance in our universe for it to just.. HAPPEN. It would have to be a series of highly, HIGHLY unprobably events.

but im not saying that its false either. Im saying NEITHER of the sides of this arguement know for sure. Religous people accept faith in God as the truth. Evolutionists accept a theory as truth. There's not much difference .

So when I say he does exist and you say he doesn't exist... And neither of us has any real way of proving one another wrong... What are we basing our arguments on?

The flat earth theory was based on the scientific method. The center of the universe theory was based on an assumption embraced by the scientific method. Explaining natural disasters via deity made sense concerning what was understood about the universe at the time, much like your argument does to you. And obviously everyone does not know God exists unless you're excluding yourself from the rest of humanity or admitting hypocriticism. Oh snap!

// edit //

I love science. Science makes atomic bombs and figures out how helicopters can fly. Evolution isn't science, it's extrapolation. We take things NOW and try and predict what happened THEN when we can't even predict what the weather is going to be like after next week. It's an assumption, easily fallible and very, very far away from being fact.

PS: I have no idea if I'm right about this, and neither are you.

I stopped reading when I read this.

The scientific method wasn't thought of until late in the 9th century.

The flat earth theory existed far before "the bible" even existed.

You missed the whole point. The point was that what was generally accepted by the majority of the population has always been disproved using science. IT ALWAYS HAS.

Or are you knowingly ignoring my point?

Now, you're just one of those people fighting against science....why?

My point is that they were all PROVED by science to begin with, which means science is not a measuring stick you can use with impunity. And Evolution is now accepted by the majority of the population, so therefore by your reasoning it must be false.

No it isn't. The only countries that have a majority of people that believe in evolution are most European nations..and Japan. The U.S. is split 50/50....sad but true

... Because those nations aren't greatly influential on our world.

Wow. And I thought you could understand what was being said this whole time.




Btw, nice pic Moch. You have 1337 Copy-&-Paste skills.

Do what I can

Nope, the Bible mentions that the Earth is a sphere lol didn't I already mention that? And it mentioned it was hanging upon nothing, i.e. not resting on the back of a turtle or something.

If I were in your position, I'd do the same...

already been said by you. nothing new.

Mr Marx does not help your case.

He is talking about a personal God. Not intelligent design

Read the Bible. obviously he didn't.

I don't remember the bible ever saying kill people who don't believe you. That is the fault of radicals who are interested only in power.

once again God isn't just gonna give you a fish. stupid fucking quote.

I challenge you to prove that. And if you cant then you finally received the meaning of this thread.

Evolution is in the same hole as religion.

I actually really like that quote, because hes not taking a side, but more accepting we may never know.

That's why 90% of people in the US believe that God exists. I'm pretty sure they've got a damn good reason too.

16% of the U.S. is non-religious. The rest are religious in many different ways. Less than 80% of people believe in the God that you are thinking about.

Sorry, just a fact check.

P.S. The percentage of people claiming to be non-religious in the past 20 or so years is rocketing upward. The cause of this is unknown, but let's hope it's that people are finally coming to their senses.

The cause is greatly known actually. Churches, i.e. the Catholic Church, are screwing themselves over by getting involved in things they once said was wrong. Priests everywhere are getting into trouble, what's that to say about the principles they attempt to teach?

Not to mention many church leaders give crappy explanations to why certain things happen, disregarding the Bible.

That is why religion, as it is, is failing. However not all religious churches are like that, and people are not all like that. Those that actually UNDERSTAND the Bible know for a fact what they are reading is true. Such as me.

EDIT: And that statistic is correct actually, well in 2003. link

Woot! We're on the beach!

/me gets naked

Then we are no more or less important than we are already.

Not to mention that's fucking big grain of sand.

What's the general theory about how we picked up our moon? I'm curious.

I actually heard a theory that it was the collision between another planet and earth, and apparently they've actually done simulations and have proven it's possible if it is 60% of the earth's mass and hits at the EXACT right angle, that the debris will be thrown into the perfect orbit and eventually coalesce into a moon.

This could also explain how life on earth was started. 2 birds one stone.

Also Wayne, in regards to your "No more important" comment, sand is created by Parrotfish eating coral and shitting it out. ALL HAIL THE PARROTFISH. If you think about it, what if every grain of sand on one of OUR beaches contains a universe as well? Afterall, what is size but just how you see something in relation to yourself.

Not sure how it holds up for other planets, the simulations I saw were just in relation to Earth, but I believe Saturn's moons were formed by its rings, so a large planet probably generates its moons through capturing enough stellar bodies which eventually lump together.

If you're REALLY interested, I can look into the issue for you.

Also, back on the sand topic, the point it is trying to express is "What makes us so special?". What if we're just one grain of sand on a beach, instead of the 'superior' race we hold ourselves as?

Science has one theory. That IF, IF everything happened exactly as they say and only then, ONLY THEN will it be pheasable the odds that everything that they say happened are infinitesmally minute.

I'm not saying everyone does, cause obviously there are many "Christians" that don't understand it fully enough to say it's a fact. *I* know it is a fact. Reasons people don't even know of back that up. But for sake of discussion, I will agree that it can be a theory as well.

Another deep thought like the grain of sand...what if we all are just living in a dream? You wake up one day and realize, what you thought was 18 or so years was, in reality, only a night?

Deeeeeep thoughts...

seriously? The bible as FACT? SERIOUSLY?! WHAAAAAAAT?!?!?!

and to answer your question, there's no such thing as magic.