Where do you stand on the Creation/Evolution controversy?

Posted by: NewLifeChristian

This is a commonly debated issue within the scientific community. Opinion: According to the Bible (and science), Biblical Creationism is the way to go.

58 Total Votes

Atheistic Evolution

34 votes

Biblical Creation

13 votes

Agnostic Evolution

6 votes
1 comment

Theistic Evolutionism

3 votes
1 comment

Progressive Creationism

1 vote

Intelligent Design

1 vote
1 comment

Deistic Evolution

0 votes

Old Earth Creationism

0 votes

Gap Creation

0 votes

Day-Age Creation

0 votes
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
NewLifeChristian says2015-08-21T21:23:37.0322341Z
I'm adding more answers.
Varrack says2015-08-21T21:31:22.5035848Z
You've already made this poll.
PetersSmith says2015-08-21T21:33:09.1926687Z
Pfft http://www.debate.org/polls/what-is-your-position-on-the-creation-evolution-controversy
NewLifeChristian says2015-08-21T21:33:26.3215785Z
@Varrack I have deleted the other two polls. I'm making a more accurate one.
dietorangesoda says2015-08-21T21:57:22.0391673Z
How the crap does science show that creationism is true?
triangle.128k says2015-08-21T22:01:47.4472211Z
NewLifeChristian, are you running out of poll ideas to the point where you recycle old polls?
NewLifeChristian says2015-08-21T22:03:09.0698063Z
@triangle.128k - I am simply making a more accurate poll.
NewLifeChristian says2015-08-21T22:03:59.7233310Z
@triangle.128k The other polls are to be deleted.
triangle.128k says2015-08-21T22:07:32.1457775Z
You surprisingly didn't properly refute almost all of my points in our debate.
CreationGuy says2015-08-21T22:08:53.2548126Z
I am for biblical creation
Oreo222 says2015-08-21T22:28:01.7598886Z
I believe that everything was created by God and he also influence the evolutionary process. What would that fall under?
triangle.128k says2015-08-21T22:35:07.3049026Z
@Oreo222 Theistic Evolution
Mister_Man says2015-08-21T23:30:30.8126070Z
@NewLifeChristian - "According to the Bible (and science), Biblical Creationism is the way to go" ...Yeah I'll need to see some scientific sources to back that up.
triangle.128k says2015-08-21T23:31:56.5805781Z
If you disagree that those are reliable scientific sources, then you're clearly judging them because you don't agree with what they say!
triangle.128k says2015-08-21T23:32:19.2957024Z
@Mister_Man I found some "scientific" sources, you should check out Answers in Genesis, Conservapedia, Institution of Creation Research and some others.
Mister_Man says2015-08-21T23:39:05.8187083Z
Ah perfect, so in other words, "random people come up with hypothesis as to why the Bible is right, with no evidence to support their claims." LOL
triangle.128k says2015-08-21T23:39:56.2559305Z
That's the argument he made against me in our debate regarding his sources...
Mister_Man says2015-08-21T23:47:18.0174634Z
Sometimes people just can't see past their own bias/idea. Sometimes they just can't see outside of their own box :( it's unfortunate.
benhos says2015-08-21T23:47:28.9896080Z
@NewLifeChristian Why would I trust a book that is ABOUT this whole subject? And I will need scientific evidence to back it up.
Mister_Man says2015-08-21T23:59:29.5685528Z
"The Bible is true because it says so in the Bible."
TBR says2015-08-22T00:21:10.2984652Z
So triangle.128k, where is this debate NewLifeChristian used Conservapedia? Love to read it.
TBR says2015-08-22T00:31:47.3386709Z
There really is no controversy. The "controversy" is only real in a narrow Christian subset.
SamStevens says2015-08-22T00:33:46.6601392Z
TBR, the debate: http://www.debate.org/debates/Evolution-vs-Young-Earth-Creationism/1/
TBR says2015-08-22T00:44:08.7590894Z
@SamStevens - Thanks, reading it now. Love on of the comments, the usual "scientific journals won't print Christian pseudo-science - UNFAIR!" The day any Christian scientist proves something they would get a nobel prize.
PericIes says2015-08-22T00:47:11.5692532Z
There are so many of these polls that it makes me want to vomit mucus until my stomach prolapses.
PericIes says2015-08-22T00:51:30.4409114Z
Also, you should not have agnostic as its own thing. Agnosticism is a label that can be assigned to either theism or atheism. Atheism is the lack of a belief in a higher power, and theism is the belief in a higher power. Gnostic means that you think you know for sure, agnostic means that you don't. So, there are agnostic theists (who believe in a higher power but admit that there is not enough proof for either side), gnostic theists (who believe in a higher power and believe that the evidence supports theism), agnostic atheists (who do not believe that there is a higher power but also don't believe that there isn't one, a.K.A. They don't have an opinon other than that there isn't enough evidence to decide one way or the other), and gnostic atheists (who believe that there is no higher power and that the evidence supports this idea).
triangle.128k says2015-08-22T00:57:36.3169720Z
Theism/atheism and Agnosticism aren't mutually inclusive.
NewLifeChristian says2015-08-22T01:13:59.0578103Z
@CreationGuy - Why didn't you vote?
NewLifeChristian says2015-08-22T01:14:18.1678103Z
@CreationGuy - Just asking. Not trying to force you to vote.
TBR says2015-08-22T01:40:19.0480218Z
@NewLifeChristian - We talking the same debate? Its still in debate, not in voting.
ramm55 says2015-08-22T01:42:53.4578116Z
Begging the Question Fallacy
Huntress says2015-08-22T06:16:56.9578596Z
I come from a Christian family, but I have to be honest with myself and I do think there is substantial proof for evolution. However, I also think there is an underlying intelligence and purpose to life, so be it theistic evolution, deistic evolution, intelligent design, etc., I think the evidence points that way.
Renegader says2015-08-22T07:19:52.0473849Z
Actually, evidence would not point to intelligent design, that is merely a fantasy to which the "moderately religious" cling.
Huntress says2015-08-22T14:13:15.1054529Z
Those who advocate atheistic evolution almost always have an anti-religious bias and their alleged rationale is in truth reactionary. For me personally, I just don't believe in the level of coincidence that would be necessary for random, unintelligible evolution. "The probability of a certain set of circumstances coming together in a meaningful (or tragic) way is so low that it simply cannot be considered mere coincidence." - V.C. King "Scientists rightly resist invoking the supernatural in scientific explanations for fear of committing a god-of-the-gaps fallacy (the fallacy of using God as a stop-gap for ignorance). Yet without some restriction on the use of chance, scientists are in danger of committing a logically equivalent fallacy-one we may call the “chance-of-the-gaps fallacy.” Chance, like God, can become a stop-gap for ignorance.” - William A. Dembski
DelilahMacgounagheeeey says2015-08-22T15:29:18.5284915Z
Really? THAT many choices?! Wow geeeee I really wonder what the OP's stance on this is....
PericIes says2015-08-23T00:15:59.1544565Z
Anyone who is gnostic in their beliefs, be they gnostic theists or gnostic atheists, are blinded by faith. Regardless of how probable you think the truth of a religion or the lack thereof might be, you can't logically deny that there is some possibility, even if it's hardly there at all, that you are wrong. Agnostic theists and atheists alike are much more reasonable than their gnostic counterparts.
vendaramar says2015-08-27T00:36:40.7939627Z
Well, when you make regularly new polls, then please add evolution without a prefix next time
ImmortalVoddoler says2015-10-26T15:03:16.0084224Z
I personally believe that everything and everyone was created last Thursday.

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.