junior elf
New member
Do you believe in it, I do and I was wondering what others think of it????
Originally posted by Avelorn
It is the best theory around. It will get revised but hardly replaced in the science anyway.
The creationists however are in many cases very intellectually dishonest which makes me frustrated and angry and probably at least a part why this is such a can of worms for a lot of people. Not that I think it is a silly way of reasoning to believe in a creator, not by far. I am myself a Christian and I believe in God and in a creation but I haven\'t had much problems combining evolution with that belief. But in general when I hear famous \"creationists\" linked to on the web they mix sound philosophical arguments with outright silliness. And as I recon they are probably clever people they are trying to trick people into believing in God and creationism and that irritates me much.
Originally posted by junior elf
I don\'t think that people who believe in Adam and Eve are crazy but that they didn\'t make up their own mind and that their parents taught it to them not letting them think for themselves.
PS: What\'s up with the worms?
Look at those beautiful blues!!!
Originally posted by Avelorn
Originally posted by junior elf
I don\'t think that people who believe in Adam and Eve are crazy but that they didn\'t make up their own mind and that their parents taught it to them not letting them think for themselves.
PS: What\'s up with the worms?
Look at those beautiful blues!!!
I think it\'s more about accepting the whole package in that case. The entire Bible as it is. People are becoming Christians all the time so I don\'t think it is necessary parental indoctrination.
Well that\'s really what it comes down to, isn\'t it? Faith. You have faith that a Creator specifically designed the butterfly to be \"beautiful\"... But that doesn\'t really address any of the scientific questions of how (physically) the butterfly got to be the way it is. I\'m not interested in trying to debunk anybody\'s religion or spirituality. I don\'t deal in matters of faith, I deal in matters of explorable reality - that which can be observed, tested and tested again. God/G_d/god/Allah/etc. is not one of those things and therefore requires, and allows, faith.Originally posted by Shawn R. L.
I seriously don\'t mean this in a mocking tone. To me, it takes FAR more faith to believe that there was no thought behind this that to believe that there is.
![]()
Darwin expressed many doubts and uncertainties about his theory, in part because he didn\'t know about genes and didn\'t know how inheritance actually took place. But he never \"recanted\" his theory, and doing so would have been meaningless in the face of the evidence for it he had already presented. And if you don\'t believe me... even the Creationist website \"Answers in Genesis\" admits it\'s true.Originally posted by alextheartist
You also have to remember that Darwin himself declared his theory a load of bull after he developed it.
Alex
Originally posted by No Such Agency
Well that\'s really what it comes down to, isn\'t it? Faith. You have faith that a Creator specifically designed the butterfly to be \"beautiful\"... But that doesn\'t really address any of the scientific questions of how (physically) the butterfly got to be the way it is. I\'m not interested in trying to debunk anybody\'s religion or spirituality. I don\'t deal in matters of faith, I deal in matters of explorable reality - that which can be observed, tested and tested again. God/G_d/god/Allah/etc. is not one of those things and therefore requires, and allows, faith.
What bothers me is when people claim science itself is a matter of faith, when science never demands that you believe something without evidence. I trust a lot of scientific findings I haven\'t personally scrutinized, but that\'s different from faith.