DA 05: Creationism vs. Evolution

aneeshm

Deity
Joined
Aug 26, 2001
Messages
6,666
Location
Mountain View, California, USA
This is thread 05 in the Devil's Advocate line of threads.

In these threads, all posters have to take exactly the opposite stance to the ones they usually take. Thus, for example, I will defend Shariah law and defend the legal "rights" of Muslims to take four wives if they want. And I'll do it sincerely, not satirically.



Note that things used here cannot be used against you in normal forum debates except in other DA debates.

The other rules and list of topics are given here: Let's play Devil's Advocate!.

Please be sure to read the rules - they're the distilled wisdom collected over all the DA threads till now.

The current thread is dedicated to an evergreen hot topic - the debate between Creationism on the one hand, and the theory of Evolution on the other, as competing ways of explaining the nature and diversity of life on the planet. Included is the idea of Intelligent Design. In fact, it doesn't matter what you believe, just argue for whatever will be the coherent opposite of that (framing your opinion as a compound statement, negating both, and ending up where you were in the beginning is a total no-no ;)).

Let the MegaFight begin!
 
The whole idea of religion is "believing". It's a step of faith, one shouldn't argue with "arguments" and "evidence" it's all a test of faith, they only distract you from your relation with The LORD.
 
If this is the consensus of the evolutionists, then why not try to argue for Creationism? Or ID, if you want more wiggle room?

And it doesn't matter if it turns out sounding satirical, as long as you're trying to be sincere.
 
If evolution were real, don't you think that over billions of years, some species of elf would have developed and survived? Creationism explains why this has not happened.
 
No one can disapprove the existence of a creator. I know that one exists as I felt his presence in my heart and in my life and in all the world around me. I can't prove this to those who will not open their hearts to see this reality but you are in the minority. You see the world in the black and white of science and think you're so creative but you're not. Look at the wonders of the human spirit and the human mind and tell me this arose from some random process which has no purpose. You see the world in a few specks of bone but this is a shallow and blind view of creation.
 
The banana and peanut butter videos show how the Creator has designed everything perfectly. Anyone who says something else is a blasphemous commie atheist. Life just can't come from nowhere, and all logical sources say the world is 6000 years old, the Bible is the word of God and more reliable than human science.
 
If this is the consensus of the evolutionists, then why not try to argue for Creationism? Or ID, if you want more wiggle room?
Because there is no intellectually coherant reason for believing them.

And it doesn't matter if it turns out sounding satirical, as long as you're trying to be sincere.
I don't think I can even try to be sincere here, Creationism/ID is just that bad.
 
We're all creationist at some point or other. All you gotta do is trace back as far as necessary:
  • No faith in science: go back 4000 years, take the Bible literally
  • Some faith in science: go back x million years, believe that the the Bible must be read allegorically and that evolution is the means of the Creator.
  • Total faith in science: believes in the Big Bang, random formation of life, we're not alone in the universe, etc.


But even those with total faith in science must admit that the Big Bang makes no sense. Even if you can say that all mass and time came into existence at this time, something must have caused it. And since the laws of physics were not valid before mass and time, this something must not have to obey the laws of physics, hence it must be some kind of being -- that is, a Creator.

See, we're all creationists. :)
 
Doesn't matter, just try. The idea is to make people try, to see how the other side thinks, nothing else.

Okay:

"Because my church says so and I'm utterly incompetant at science?"

How's that?
 
This particular DA doenst blend very well for the simple fact, both of these are not mutually exclusive of one another. It is perfectly reasonable/feasible to be able to create something that has the ability to evolve.
 
This particular DA doenst blend very well for the simple fact, both of these are not mutually exclusive of one another. It is perfectly reasonable/feasible to be able to create something that has the ability to evolve.
This is true, any Creation/Evolution thread is characterised by the fact that every creationist argument against evolution uses a strawman. Doesn't exactly make for a great debate.
 
Zomg! Evolutionists think a fish crawled out of the sea and grew wings and lungs and that's where birds came from. That's so stoopid.

Um... yeah.
 
Back
Top Bottom