The Creation Debate: What have you read?

[Hurin_Rules]

There's a debate?

A debate usually implies a rational discourse. Most creationists rely on Faith for their belief; one cannot change their mind through reason, just as one cannot change an evolutionist's mind through faith. Debates thus tend to be sterile, if they can even be called such.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I've read about half of Darwin's Origin of Species. Out of sheer curiousty, and because I heard he writes really well. It was very interesting.
For scientific purposes, a modern biology textbook would be better suited. Evolutionary thinking has progressed a lot since the days of Darwin. (One doesn't read Newton for the last word in physics either)

I've read most of the bible too. Didn't finish the new testament. Some guy in church spoiled it for me - he revealed the hero dies in the end.

[Papewaio]

I debate more to refine my understanding and to understand why someone else has theirs. That aside it is using two different ideas that have different burdens of proof. Science is a series of theories that try and provide a best fit to the data and remains open to be debated and modified as better techiques, data and understanding come about. Creationism is a literal translation of two different (conflicting) allegorical tales which does not require any proof but is a faith based execise.

Creationist "Evolution is only a theory."
Scientist "Damn straight it is, just like gravity is just a theory."

[AntiochusIII]

I've read most of the bible too. Didn't finish the new testament. Some guy in church spoiled it for me - he revealed the hero dies in the end.

Into the Sig!

[doc_bean]

About science vs evolution: science is trying to answer the question: how ? Religion should only concern itself with the question: why ?

So asking how the different species come to be is the domain of science. Why there is creation in the first place, why the laws of physics allow live etc. is the domain of religion.

I've read most of the bible too. Didn't finish the new testament. Some guy in church spoiled it for me - he revealed the hero dies in the end.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

He comes back from the dead !

[English assassin]

Darwin refused to discuss his own beliefs about a supreme being in public, once writing to his friend Asa Gray, "I feel most deeply that the whole subject is too profound for human intellect. A dog might as well speculate on the mind of Newton."

Wow. Not only does Charlie formulate the theory of evolution, in 2 lines he totally pwns the bishops on their home ground. Is this guy God or what?

[ajaxfetish]

To return to the poll topic, as I think this was intended as something other than one more opinion/argument thread, I've read the Bible (KJV) along with the Apocrypha and a few other contemporary sources, but only snippets from Origin, though I've had enough biological science classes to feel at least reasonably well informed on evolutionary theory. I support evolution and don't feel it conflicts with my religious beliefs. I like the way doc bean put it:

About science vs evolution: science is trying to answer the question: how ? Religion should only concern itself with the question: why ?

So asking how the different species come to be is the domain of science. Why there is creation in the first place, why the laws of physics allow live etc. is the domain of religion.

The one thing that upsets me about this poll is there was no option for people who support creationism but have only read the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster!

and re: Crossroad, considering what a theory is and what it's supposed to do, your satirical reply to Tribesman didn't have much substance.

Ajax

[Kralizec]

I've read about half of Darwin's Origin of Species. Out of sheer curiousty, and because I heard he writes really well. It was very interesting.
For scientific purposes, a modern biology textbook would be better suited. Evolutionary thinking has progressed a lot since the days of Darwin. (One doesn't read Newton for the last word in physics either)

I've read most of the bible too. Didn't finish the new testament. Some guy in church spoiled it for me - he revealed the hero dies in the end.

You missed the part where he ressurects!
"Jesus is back...and this time, it's biblical"

[Louis VI the Fat]

Meh, I hate it when authors ressurect dead heroes in the sequel to cash in on the succes. Such a cliché. Let me guess, next you'll tell me that there's also a Darth Vader act where the two main protagonists turn out to be father and son, right? And that only the father knew all this time?

[AntiochusIII]

Meh, I hate it when authors ressurect dead heroes in the sequel to cash in on the succes. Such a cliché. Let me guess, next you'll tell me that there's also a Darth Vader act where the two main protagonists turn out to be father and son, right? And that only the father knew all this time?

Well, the father has been talked about throughout the book. This guy sees him, that guy meets him, they heard this, they say that, and not once does the book actually comes out to say who he is. I think the sequel would reveal who the Father actually is. My bet is on the 261th beggar. And I'm sure the authors will make it dramatic this time. Something along the lines of, "I...am your Father!" and "Noooooooooo!!!"

[English assassin]

Meh, I hate it when authors ressurect dead heroes in the sequel to cash in on the succes. Such a cliché. Let me guess, next you'll tell me that there's also a Darth Vader act where the two main protagonists turn out to be father and son, right? And that only the father knew all this time?

Couple that with a deus ex machina ending and you've just about got it.

Oh, and did we tell you about all the prequels?

[macsen rufus]

Most of the bible; not Darwin but more recent writers on evolution (E O Wilson).

I'm afraid when it comes to Creationism, I can't help recalling that all serious creationists come from that part of the world that tried to legislate that pi=4. Nuff said, really....

[doc_bean]

Most of the bible; not Darwin but more recent writers on evolution (E O Wilson).

I'm afraid when it comes to Creationism, I can't help recalling that all serious creationists come from that part of the world that tried to legislate that pi=4. Nuff said, really....

Surely, they must have gone for pi=3 ??? Otherwise it would be total madness !!!