Creationism vs Evolution

[oldagerocker]

humans had a reason to adapt, to survive, they stated to learn to kill and eat animals, and they had a higher diet of protein, therefore over the generations, they grew more and the brain developed. Those that didnt evolve died out, they couldnt compete with newer situations, we had to survive an ice age you know!!

 

[Lil' Timmy]

We don't need bigger brains to be smarter though. Modern computers are an excellent example of this. The faster computers are actually smaller, and to go faster they're going to have to get smaller.

that's not a good analogy. the human brain, like all organic brains is constrained by biological rules, not technological ones. that said, the relation of the size of a brain to the 'intelligence' of it's organismm is very poorly understood.

I don't think man had a reason to evolve from monkeys. We evolve for a reason don't we, I mean that's part of the theory isn't it? What was that reason though. Why are there still monkeys now? If there was a reason to evolve, why is there still a remenance of the past. Why is there still a remenance of the old, of what needed to change? Don't they need to be like us?

human didn't evolve from "monkeys", instead, all primates share an extinct ancestor. it was a proto-ape-monkey creature, if you will. the "reason" behind evolution is simple natural selection, more of a force than a reason. some people believe in directional evolution (evolution towards a goal), but that belief is as much fantasy as creationism, imo, and there is as little evidence for the former belief as the latter.

The part I don't understand is why every evolutionist says creationism is a huge leap of faith. Of course it takes faith. But wouldn't that make evolutionism as much a religion also? Because it's just a theory, it's never been proven and never will be. And it requires faith, why isn't it as much a religion as creationism?

it's not a matter of proof (nothing in the real world can be proven to hte extent of a mathematical proof because we don't have the luxury of defining our reality, like in mathematics), it's a matter of evidence. the preponderance of evidence points to evolution. there is no credible evidence that indicates creationism.

For all we know, it takes faith to believe I'm real and typing this. None of you know I'm real but it takes faith.

that's an epistemological arguement; it has nothing to do with the discussion, unless you want to argue from a global skeptics POV, in which case neither evolution, creationism, or possibly one's own self existence should be believed. but that's another thread

I'm a pretty devout Roman Catholic and as such, I don't take a literal approach to the Bible.

As a result, I see no conflict between the theories of Creationism or Evolution. How is that possible? Simple - God allowed Evolution to happen. If one looks at the series of events in Genesis and Darwin's theories, they share some remarkable similarities. For example, God said "Let There Be Light...and There Was Light". This could EASILY be the "Big Bang" that formed the universe. Look at the progression of species in Genesis, from the water to the land to man (Adam and Eve) - this follows the progression of Evolution as well.

The way I see it is this - the Bible was written thousands of years ago and the human mind hadn't developed to such a stage as to grasp the concept of Evolution. Thus, when God explained the story of how the world came about to Moses (who wrote Genesis), He had to use a simplified version...otherwise He would've gotten a big "Huh?!?" from Moses.

an interesting story.. but you should realize that "creationism" refers to a specific theory about hte nature of existence. i think you mean that you don't see a conflict between evolution and *creation*. b/c it'd be pretty impossible not to see a conflict between creationism and evolution.

edit: :stare: i went back and fixed my spelling.. thanks rocker

 

[oldagerocker]

"neither evolution, creationism, or possible one's own self existence should be believed. but that's another thread"

Matrix theory baby lol



lets really not go there!

 

[Yakuza]

If you take it literally, there's loads of contradictions in the bible... i just see it as a fairy-tale story, Based in possible factual events but exaggerated and changed through the years to extremes. It does convery morals that people can follow tho, therefore, the appropriate religion.

Show me one.

 

[Yakuza]

I'm a pretty devout Roman Catholic and as such, I don't take a literal approach to the Bible.

As a result, I see no conflict between the theories of Creationism or Evolution. How is that possible? Simple - God allowed Evolution to happen. If one looks at the series of events in Genesis and Darwin's theories, they share some remarkable similarities. For example, God said "Let There Be Light...and There Was Light". This could EASILY be the "Big Bang" that formed the universe. Look at the progression of species in Genesis, from the water to the land to man (Adam and Eve) - this follows the progression of Evolution as well.

The way I see it is this - the Bible was written thousands of years ago and the human mind hadn't developed to such a stage as to grasp the concept of Evolution. Thus, when God explained the story of how the world came about to Moses (who wrote Genesis), He had to use a simplified version...otherwise He would've gotten a big "Huh?!?" from Moses.

Are you talking Miro or Macro. I would agree with you is your talking Micro but if your saying macro your fooling yourself.

I think its rather funny that you think the human mind has evolved so much. God gave the Law to mosses for the samething people continue to do today.

 

[Puffbunny]

i sometimes dunno where i stand on all this... I was watching a (suprisingly civil) discussion once between a Creationist preacher and a Darwinian specialist, and the Creationist made a pretty interesting point. He said,

"If I were to take my watch apart to its base components, then toss them up into the air, what are the chances that they'd fall together into a full watch again? And that's what evolution represents to me. If there's a watch, there must be a watchmaker."

Then, I thought "But if you spend a couple million years tossing the parts up nonstop, and thousands of others were too all over the world, wouldn't it happen eventually?"

 

[blahblahblah]

And I don't wanna flame here, but that's mostly because of the stubborn creationists.

You don't exactly sound innocent yourself. Most people contradict themself in a single/multiple posts, but you manage to do it in a single sentance.

Try to be considerate of other peoples beliefs. Thank-you.