Originally posted by Anonymouse Well, my initial post to this thread should give you an idea, furthermore I'll be adding stuff when I return.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Evolution and Religion
Collapse
X
-
-
note the terms which they use to describing evolution
evolutionary dogma
A scientific religion
A satisfactory faith
Man's world view
As Ehrlich and Birch have said: "Every conceivable observation can be fitted into it.—No one can think of ways in which to test it".
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by loseyourname If you think science leaves no room for polemics, you don't know much history. Every single revolutionary scientific theory that has ever been formulated has been met with fierce resistance, in particular by religious organizations. Nobody within the mainstream scientific community questions whether or not evolution happened. The questions all lie in how it happened. Religion's place is to question why it happened.
This is to say: if there is a scientific point bringing polemics, then it is not (yet) a science. It becomes science when it is proven.
Thks for the religion point, loose and sleuth, i didn't get that.
Anyway, my point of view is different. I don't believe in this creation religious craps, but i still believe in God. And i'm wondering why. The fact is that faith is not as bounded to science as mentionned in this thread.
Sciences tend to discredit religion, but as i said very early (badly) in this thread, the idea of God is natural when we look at mankind. Religion and God are definitely not the same things. At least, it's my opinion.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by loseyourname You have also yet to name a contradiction or a flaw.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by loseyourname You have still yet to propose an alternative. If there is no connection between old and new species, why are they so closely anatomically related? Furthermore, if point mutation and natural selection are not the culprits, how does speciation occur?
As for close anatomical relationship, for all we know God was perfecting his creatures, creating one with the blueprint of the previous. Who knows, I don't claim to know, why does science assume it alone knows?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Anonymouse Precisely, which is why evolution is a like class of faith. But look for a response saying "evolution is testable, and provable". Well that all depends on what you agree, macro or micro evolution?
There have been enough contradictions and flaws since Darwin, to now, for it to be an infallible theory. Theories are theories, treat them all the same.
Leave a comment:
-
You have still yet to propose an alternative. If there is no connection between old and new species, why are they so closely anatomically related? Furthermore, if point mutation and natural selection are not the culprits, how does speciation occur?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by sleuth As a matter of fact, many leading evolutionists have recognized the essentially " religious" character of evolutionism. Even though they themselves believe evolution to be true, they acknowledge the fact that they believe it! "Science", however, is not supposed to be something one "believes". Science is knowledge—that which can be demonstrated and observed and repeated. Evolution cannot be proved, or even tested; it can only be believed.
see how close they are ...evolution is theory as much as creation
There have been enough contradictions and flaws since Darwin, to now, for it to be an infallible theory. Theories are theories, treat them all the same.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by loseyourname There is a mountain of evidence consisting mostly of experiments conducted with bacteria and by observations of galapagos finches. Small changes are observed - in the case of microorganisms, jumps to entirely new species have been observed.
You have yet to propose an alternative explanation as to why the fossil record shows closely related species following one another chronologically and geographically.
Leave a comment:
-
As a matter of fact, many leading evolutionists have recognized the essentially " religious" character of evolutionism. Even though they themselves believe evolution to be true, they acknowledge the fact that they believe it! "Science", however, is not supposed to be something one "believes". Science is knowledge—that which can be demonstrated and observed and repeated. Evolution cannot be proved, or even tested; it can only be believed.
see how close they are ...evolution is theory as much as creation
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: