The Official Perfection KOs Creationism Thread Part Four: The Genesis of Ire!
- Thread starter Perfection
- Start date
- Status
You know, I was thinking (I do that occasionally). Isn't this thread supposed to be about KOing creationism, based on the title of the thread? So shouldn't people be discussing the merits and demerits of creationism, rather than focusing on evolution? Also, creationism and evolution are NOT mutually exclusive. I really don't understand why creationists fight against evolution so much. "god created the universe and he created evolution." Then you're done! You can have your cake and burn it too. For creationists to argue that god created the universe, it really does NOT require that they debunk evolution. You can even say that god made the species as they are today. How? god guided evolution. Then you're done! It's so easy!
brennan
Argumentative Brit
Because if you let evolution 'create' every living thing, then God didn't do it.
No, I can easily believe that evolution is the means by which God created life.
But then someone could just say that god guided evolution.
Love
Deity
@phlegmak: Indeed, as evolution is a combination of mutations plus selection (mostly). I could then argue that God had a hand in the mutations, upon which selection then acted.
@GR: Because you think the position is contradictory, or just because you don't believe in God?
@GR: Because you think the position is contradictory, or just because you don't believe in God?
Love
Deity
Weel, i do belive in the FSM but i still not belive that there where a god... Just a big flying invisible monster that more look like a italian lunch than god
...
Chandrasekhar
Determined
Hm... perhaps the whole point of this thread is not to say that God didn't create life as we know it, but that life as we know it could have come about without the intervention of God.
brennan
Argumentative Brit
Hey, don't look at an atheist and complain Creationists don't make sense. I know. That philosophy is called 'Theistic Evolution' btw. They argue a lot with Creationists.
Indeed, some of the most vocal critics of Creationism are theistic evolutionists, both here and in real life. For example, the judge who ruled on Dover v. Katzmiller (I think it is called) is a devout Christian.
EDIT: As Perfection points out, this thread is for science, this thread is to discuss the theological implications.
EDIT: As Perfection points out, this thread is for science, this thread is to discuss the theological implications.
Perfection
The Great Head.
The thread topics are clearly outlined in the opening post. It is about antievolutionary creationism (forms that limit or deny evolution) and evolution. It is also soley from the scientific perspective as I do not want to get into the theological implications of evolution; that's Eran's department not mine.
In an older thread, I brought forward the idea that Creationism (along with a superior lifespan in the past) would show a degrading of mtDNA over generations (or some other thing which explained an increase in the aging rate)
Lord Parkin
aka emperor
I have to admit that I don't agree with you there. However, your position is at least one I can respect. I do not have a problem with the fact that some people believe in God; that is their choice, and as long as they are not trying to force their beliefs upon me then I don't mind. What I do have a problem with is when some few people try to debunk the entire scientific method in the name of what they believe to be God. You are not trying to argue that the entire evolutionary theory is hogwash, which certain other participants in this thread have been doing - and thus I respect your position.
I don't believe too many people actually means the entire evolution theory is hogwash as much as the evolutionary creation story is hogwash. Mutation and selection is a factor in nature but these along doesn't have the super-natural powers to designed so many different we find in nature. So as a creationist I see living cells/creatures having limits of what it can do even with billions of years on it's own. I don't believe in Frankencell as the creator.You are not trying to argue that the entire evolutionary theory is hogwash, which certain other participants in this thread have been doing - and thus I respect your position.
Perfection
The Great Head.
Extent is a vital componant to evolutionary theory. It's what gives it its immense explanitory power. To say that evolutionary theory is only the mechanics of natural selection and not about historical convergence is to throw out much of its utility.
A lot of this evolution explain power comes from and based on the human imagination. As "the little eyeball that could" story. TOE itself really doesn't explain much at all.
Xanikk999
History junkie
Human imagination? Or human knowledge rather.
The eyeball has already been explained countless times on the internet and probably in this thread also.
If you want il link it if you dont beileve me.
Perfection
The Great Head.
Except for fact that all those intermediary steps exist in living animals
Xanikk999
History junkie
Exactly! Flatworms as far as i know have "eye spots" which can detect light.
Thats an intermediary step.
- Status
