Re: Creation vs Evolution
I really have to agree with Rory here, you can't bring science into it to prove it could happen if you contradict every scientific prove against its possibility by saying "that doesn't apply to God". Either you believe God plays by the rules (the Rules of physics and nature in general, which He might have made, different issue) or you don't, if you believe the latter (an interventionist God) than pretty much all science is flawed and pointless, since God does whatever he wants anyway. You can't say the flood could have happened because God poured some extra water in, and then say that fish, plants, wildlife etc could survive based on scientific theory. The flood (as described by the Bible) couldn't have happened in the first place, so all conclusions based on the hypothesis that it happened are ridicoulous. You might as well say the gravity works in reverse and then say: "that's why Jesus ascended to heaven". It's pseudo science, an abomination to real science. As is creationism in general, reallyOriginally Posted by crossroad
Seriously, you said you like a thinker, then become one. Look at the evidence, and then make up your mind, either the laws of physics (whatever they may be) apply 100% of the time, or God just makes it up as He goes along. You seem to accept micro-evolution (whatever that is) but don't accept it on a macro-level ? Why, what's the difference ? One is simply an extension of another. You talk about species not turning into different species, and that is, for the most part, right, a canine doesn't evolve into a cat, and a plant isn't likely to sprout legs anytime soon. But their DNA, their code, adjusts, adapts. This you can accept, it seems. Now if the code changes enough, why won't you call it a different species ? What even, is your definition of a species ?
You link to all these sites (well two, it seems) but have you ever considered that that is less than 1% of what is written about evolution ? That there might be a reason why everyone seems to prefer evolution ? A few people don't, you're always going to have those, some people probably don't believe in atoms. But since 1 scientist out of thousands disagrees it doesn't make him right. And if you're thinking of bringing Einstein or Planck into this: they had their own different theories which could explain observed phenomena far better than the current reigning theories. Creationism doesn't explain squat. It doesn't answer the one true science question 'How ?'. Because God did it ? That's not an answer, if we accepted that, then we'd all still be bowing down every thunderstorm and dance to make it rain. If human understanding has shown as anything, it's that things tend to happen because they have been caused by something else, life, the universe and everything else is like a giant, complex domino. Sure, you could answer who/what or why it all started, and you might say god did it. But an all powerful being that occasionally knocks some blocks over just because ? Please. We have mastered electricity, we have mastered nuclear power, we can build machines with single atoms, we have mastered flight. Why ? Because someone, somewhere, didn't accept the answer 'God causes it'. And so far, we have always been proven right, we have always found a cause. There is no reason to believe we have reached our limit here. In fact, evolution explains the world pretty darn well even.
I probably won't post much in this thread anymore, I find it to tyring, like shouting at a brick wall. So I'll just, once again, summarize my point: THINK. Don't start with the Bible as the answer and work your way backwards. Start with the facts: diversity, DNA etc. and then THINK. Think about how that could have come to be, and if you happen to think God did it, remember Newton didn't accept that as answer as to why things fall down. THINK.
Ah, the stories I could tell about incapable doctors....
Bookmarks