Vote
79 Total Votes
1

Evolution

53 votes
6 comments
2

Creationism

26 votes
3 comments
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Silly_Billy says2017-05-23T21:23:40.4695442Z
Creationism is a theory that has no evidence. It is build on the assumption that it is the ''default'' position of how everything came to be and for as long as no other theory can offer 100% conclusive evidence that Creationism is not the way that it happened (99% is ''NOT'' 100%), it is to stay the default position.
flyingcolors says2017-05-23T22:02:35.5711442Z
Actually, they both are correct. I'm you look to the biblical version of the creation of the universe and compare it to how we predicted the universe and life began, you will find that it happens in the same order. Understand that a million years for us would be a day for god. After all, our days are made through the sun, god and man both do not look to the sun to measure days and time. Let there be light - the big bang seas and sky - this is when water formed on earth sun moon stars - by this time the light of the stars would reach earth and the sun and the moon would have formed and be made visible land plants and trees - by this time dry land would have formed, plants would have started growing and bacteria and microscopic organisms would appear on earth(it isn't mentioned in the bible because they are tiny and wouldn't be considered as life back then) creatures of the sea - the microscopic organisms evolve and grow bigger with more complex features, eventually becoming fish, whales, snails, etc. Animals (man) - by this time, fish crawled out of the sea and through evolution became what we call, animals god rests - after that, no more new species, just the evolution of old ones. Creationism proves evolutionism, however, evolutionism alone is not real. And if anyone is wondering, no I am not an adult, I am a 13-year-old catholic who is a huge science geek. Thank you ;)
flyingcolors says2017-05-23T22:04:45.8467442Z
Actually, they both are correct. I'm you look to the biblical version of the creation of the universe and compare it to how we predicted the universe and life began, you will find that it happens in the same order. Understand that a million years for us would be a day for god. After all, our days are made through the sun, god and man both do not look to the sun to measure days and time. Let there be light - the big bang. Seas and sky - this is when water formed on earth. Sun moon stars - by this time the light of the stars would reach earth and the sun and the moon would have formed and be made visible. Land plants and trees - by this time dry land would have formed, plants would have started growing and bacteria and microscopic organisms would appear on earth(it isn't mentioned in the bible because they are tiny and wouldn't be considered as life back then) . Creatures of the sea - the microscopic organisms evolve and grow bigger with more complex features, eventually becoming fish, whales, snails, etc. Animals (man) - by this time, fish crawled out of the sea and through evolution became what we call, animals. God rests - after that, no more new species, just the evolution of old ones. Creationism proves evolutionism, however, evolutionism alone is not real. And if anyone is wondering, no I am not an adult, I am a 13-year-old catholic who is a huge science geek. Thank you ;)
reece says2017-05-25T17:16:03.4641738Z
@lyingcolors First off, a million years would be nothing to a god that is eterminal.
reece says2017-05-25T17:19:08.9325738Z
Eternal*
flyingcolors says2017-05-25T21:05:20.6049738Z
Reece, true but i just chose a big number. I didn't pay attention to the exact size as long as it was big. Thax for caring enough to read my comment though! ;)
flyingcolors says2017-05-25T21:11:18.1569738Z
I just used a million to show in a simple way how great and eternal God is. How compared to him, we are nothing.
reece says2017-05-27T00:58:16.3883980Z
@flyingcolors Second off, the time it takes light to travel to Earth varies, greatly. From 8 light minutes, to 14 billion light years. And that's only the observable universe. Earth is only 4.5 billion years old. In comparison, saying most light is older than Earth, is an understatement.
ladiesman says2017-05-29T21:08:10.3307439Z
Whether or not God created the universe, as Genesis says, or whether or not species evolved via natural selection, as Darwin says, the two ideas neither include nor exclude each other. The question of creation is not a scientific issue, it's a philosophical and theological one.
flyingcolors says2017-05-29T22:18:26.4023439Z
Reece, I understand what you mean. I only simplified it so others better understand it without me having to create a 15-page essay.
reece says2017-05-29T22:34:06.5207439Z
@flyingcolors Third off, try to think about why bacteria and m̲i̲c̲r̲o̲s̲c̲o̲p̲i̲c organisms weren't mentioned in the bible.
Silly_Billy says2017-06-01T15:46:15.8861801Z
Reece, does it really matter that bacteria and m̲i̲c̲r̲o̲s̲c̲o̲p̲i̲c organisms weren't mentioned in the bible? Flyingcolors already said that he believes in evolution. The only difference between you and him is that he thinks that the origin of life could have been caused by creationism and to be absolutely truthful, even though I do not share that view, I (and neither science) have no evidence to the contrary.
reece says2017-06-02T03:39:04.7687983Z
@Silly_Billy 1. Flyingcolors was the first to bring up bacteria and microscopic organisms not being in the bible. 2. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim.
Silly_Billy says2017-06-02T08:07:40.7507399Z
@Reece: I see, I thought you were trying to debunk his creationist stance even though there is no real evidence that life was created in any other fashion. Still, I don't believe in God so the idea that life was created by a God is not one that I support, but until science has found the smoking gun on that one people ought to be able to believe what they want to believe without being ridiculed. Besides, aliens could have done it which means that life on Earth would still have started in a creationist fashion and the next battle would be, "And who created those Aliens?"
reece says2017-06-02T09:00:59.4839399Z
Silly_Billy, I have a problem when people claim their religious beliefs (such as their form of creationism) as fact. Especially if it involves the littoral interpretation of the six days of creation. Would you allow scientific illiterate people to choose what "science" to teach and/or learn when it comes to public schooling? You seem like the type of person.
Silly_Billy says2017-06-02T09:15:39.7919399Z
@Reece: I object to those people as well but flyingcolors does not strike me as one. Actually, the fact that he is not denying evolution even though he is religious tells me that he is not some sort of close minded, dogmatic believer but someone who uses his brain. You are right of coarse that creationism is not some sort of fact, but where the origins of life itself are concerned, we have no facts.
reece says2017-06-03T02:43:22.7695459Z
Silly_Billy, what's your problem? Why are you trying to defend (or whatever this is) someone who you claim isn't dogmatic and close minded? I find it strange. Why would you have a problem with me challenging his beliefs? Isn't it healthy?
sydstorm says2017-07-06T11:17:20.2262252Z
Americans you are so... "slow". There is no proof to creationism, so it false until proven otherwise.
Leo_Sanguine says2017-07-18T19:47:43.3854996Z
Both, self replicating molecules can't just become a conscious human in billions of years, but evolution has lots of evidence and both sound feasible
The_808_Debator says2017-10-19T00:56:21.7761641Z
@Sydstorm, There is actually a lot of evidence to prove that creationism is true. It is no different from evolution, evolution has no solid or observable proof. Creationism definitely makes sense if you look at the big picture. I have studied Creationism and Evolution, and the evidence for Creationism is far more compelling, reasonable, and believable. From what you said, leads me to believe that you are biased, and have not done enough research in Creationism. PS. Please don't call Americans slow. Creationism is a WORLDWIDE belief, not an american one.
Magno7179 says2017-12-22T18:14:32.8180331Z
Science will never find the truth of why we exist if it doesn’t accept a eternal being exusted. All things that are contagent are substances that could of existed or not and at some point will die. We can all agree that contagent substance create other contagent substances, this will make a long chain. At some point, there will have to be a eternal being or the chain will go on forever. That eternal being had to be all powerful since to create something out of nothing will take a tons of energy. Such eternal being and all powerful being is what we call god. After all science is can’t be for sure, since you don’t know if what you dont see is real. How am I supposed to believe atoms exist if I’ve never seen them. How am I supposed to believ that when I’m looking at a cell through a microscop is really a cell. When I drop something, how do I know its gravity dropping it and not electro magnitism or some other force. My point is, you don’t know what you don’t see is true and even if you do see it, how do you know your senses aren’t decieving you. Science is built on faith just as creationism. So if you want to criticize that creationism doesn’t have evidence, just faith, well your evidence on science is filled witch faith. You just hope that what you don’t see is real and what you do see is really as it is, thats how every fact in science is developt and will always be that way.
ladybug653 says2018-01-13T15:22:10.9282058Z
Not creationism in the literal bible sense of the word, but I think something intelligent is behind this.
Spiffy-Gonzalez says2018-01-13T19:15:42.2970722Z
The basis of creationism is the idea that their are things beyond the realm of science. Seeing as science can neither prove nor disprove this idea, it is safe to conclude that no scientific standpoint can be made on the subject. The basis of evolution is that we evolved from an inferior sub species and that all things MUST evolve. However, numerous species have been found that have existed for millions of years without much change, which goes against the idea of evolution. The backing behind both is largely based upon assumptions with very little real science for either. However, creationism has no evidence against it, whereas evolution does. So from a logical standpoint I would have to say creationism is 'more' correct than evolution. ...If that makes sense to my fellows in the comments section.
i0.7734 says2018-03-25T23:04:00.5244532Z
The biggest problem i see brought up by creationists is that it is a random system and this is true in a vacuum, but in a developed environment such as earth in witch adaptation can and has been shown to be able to be forcibly indued by enough individuals over a long enough lineage. Evolution has limits and is acted upon by physical limiting factors.
smokey0990 says2018-06-23T21:37:01.0879693Z
Can we stop trying to force religious views into science? Science is not based on faith, just because you don't understand the evidence does not make it less valid. All actual evidence supports evolution, there is zero evidence to prove creationism. Creationists point to a lack of evidence and invoke God. Today it's "We don't know what caused the big bang, therefore it must be God" and "we don't understand how dark matter and dark energy work, therefore God". Before that it was "We don't understand why the planets don't fling each other into deep space, therefore God". Before that it was "We don't understand why the planets move the way they do if they are all orbiting the earth, therefore God". Before that it was "We don't understand floods hurricanes tornadoes volcanoes and other natural disasters, therefore God". It is absolutely no different than saying "We don't understand how the Egyptians made the pyramids, therefore aliens". A lack of evidence is not the evidence of God, science is a learning process, there will likely always be things it can not explain. The idea that anything not yet explained must be God has slowed scientific progress by hundreds of years. Was Isaac Newton really incapable of figuring out how the gravity of different planetary bodies interacted with one another? We will never know, because he said "God did it" then closed the book. There is nothing wrong with believing in God, it becomes a problem only when you try to force your ideas of God into the realm of science. Science is based on fact, religious belief is based on faith. You can not combine the 2 just to make yourself feel more secure in what you have already decided to believe before you ever looked at the facts. If you want to believe that God created the universe that is perfectly fine. In that case you should look at science as our understanding of God's creation. Do not look at it as a way to prove your religious beliefs, science does not prove nor disprove God and it probably never will. If you feel the need to twist science into proof of your God, then I question whether you truly believe in him or not. Because if you need proof then you do not have faith.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.