Debate and Discussion

Creationism VS Evolution
ozoneocean at 5:43PM, March 26, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,789
joined: 1-2-2006
Ha! Not semantics. Rather: a better definition :p
“Improvement” suggests a concept of nebulously “making something better” which it is in a single sense, but can easily be misconstrued to mean that a species is actually getting better and being refined above the level of the earlier “versions” when this is not actually the case. “Adaption” much more accurately describes the process. ^_^
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:26PM
subcultured at 5:46PM, March 26, 2007
(online)
posts: 5,392
joined: 1-7-2006
it is making it better.
by improving the chance of survival.
still an argument of semantics
J
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:01PM
reconjsh at 5:55PM, March 26, 2007
(online)
posts: 663
joined: 12-18-2006
i guess my point is what sub suggested. That if the purpose of humans being imperfect is to change (evolve), then that seems counter inuitive to nature being created perfect.

but whatever… i'm tired.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:02PM
Aurora Moon at 11:09PM, March 26, 2007
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
reconjsh
i guess my point is what sub suggested. That if the purpose of humans being imperfect is to change (evolve), then that seems counter inuitive to nature being created perfect.

but whatever… i'm tired.

that's the thing. I don't conidser Nature to be perfect… just complex.

Nature has plenty of other flawed animals out there… has plenty of flawed organisms such as tree speicies, etc….

it may just seem so complcated to the point where they seem perfect.. but they're not. they just have an complex body and or system.

take the ecosystem of any natural land, for instance. If nature itself was so perfect, then why would the ecosystem be so fragile?
take for example… bugs. at first those bugs seems like nothing but little, tiny annoying insects that couldn't possible serve any grand purpose in the bigger picture..
but if an whole speices goes exitict, then animals such as birds who has an whole diet conisted of only those bugs is in danger of going extict.
Which is bad, because the animals like the birds serves an big imporant part in keeping the lands/plants healthy in an sense… and if they're gone.. then less plants and trees may grow.. and then cease to vanish off the face of the earth because of the lack of active bodies carring thier pollen/seeds around to other plants to keep the procreation of the plants going.

why is the ecosystem so fragile that it would depend on even the smallest bugs to keep it going? and why does it become so fucked up if that bug is gone?

that's just an example though, in case anybody gets on my case on how flawed my scenerio was.

but I'm sure you get my point.
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:10AM
ozoneocean at 4:31AM, March 27, 2007
(online)
posts: 24,789
joined: 1-2-2006
subcultured
it is making it better.
by improving the chance of survival.
still an argument of semantics
Nope. It only increases the chances of survival of that particular iteration of that evolution of that species in its specific environment, other members of its species that didn't go through those adaptions but are exisiting in environments that don't require it anyway aren't “worse” than the “evolved” species and it is no “better” than they. So you see, “better” applies too specifically to be much use (in many senses “better” is actually incorrect), while “adaption” describes the whole process and is true in all senses. 8D
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:26PM
reconjsh at 9:05AM, March 27, 2007
(online)
posts: 663
joined: 12-18-2006
Aurora Moon
reconjsh
i guess my point is what sub suggested. That if the purpose of humans being imperfect is to change (evolve), then that seems counter inuitive to nature being created perfect.

but whatever… i'm tired.

that's the thing. I don't conidser Nature to be perfect… just complex.

Nature has plenty of other flawed animals out there… has plenty of flawed organisms such as tree speicies, etc….

it may just seem so complcated to the point where they seem perfect.. but they're not. they just have an complex body and or system.

take the ecosystem of any natural land, for instance. If nature itself was so perfect, then why would the ecosystem be so fragile?
take for example… bugs. at first those bugs seems like nothing but little, tiny annoying insects that couldn't possible serve any grand purpose in the bigger picture..
but if an whole speices goes exitict, then animals such as birds who has an whole diet conisted of only those bugs is in danger of going extict.
Which is bad, because the animals like the birds serves an big imporant part in keeping the lands/plants healthy in an sense… and if they're gone.. then less plants and trees may grow.. and then cease to vanish off the face of the earth because of the lack of active bodies carring thier pollen/seeds around to other plants to keep the procreation of the plants going.

why is the ecosystem so fragile that it would depend on even the smallest bugs to keep it going? and why does it become so fucked up if that bug is gone?

that's just an example though, in case anybody gets on my case on how flawed my scenerio was.

but I'm sure you get my point.
I wasn't talking about what you think. I was talking about what creationist scientists have claimed.

In the Bible, nature was created perfect… complete… fully formed. It is only man that is allowed to be flawed at creation.

Furthermore, if you go watch those creation science videos… a theme in all of them is how perfect God created existance. In the context of creationism v evolution, how creation scientists claim God created existance and life is very relevant.

And like I said, they claim it's perfect. Go watch the videos. Dinosaurs - extinct from man's imperfection. Ecosystems breaking down - mans fault. The world heading to a natural apcolypse from global warming and the like - mans doing.

That's all their words, not mine. And my last few posts are a counter arguement to that arguement. That: it seems counter-intuitive to bother making a “perfect” world with the sole intent of allowing man the space to f things up.

But your point is right aurora… nature isn't perfect… and thus, it only strengthens the point that the Bible is not a literal account of creation.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:02PM
Aurora Moon at 7:45PM, March 27, 2007
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
ah, I see. the way you worded it, it seemed like you were talking about your own views and how you were confused.

sorry about the mix-up. but yeah, that kind of logic seems strange from the creationist scientists.
man's not responsible for every natural disaster. if that was true, then the people who blamed America for the tsunami disaster in that one country would be somewhat right, because humans would be indirectly responsible for it!
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:10AM
Atom Apple at 4:08PM, March 28, 2007
(online)
posts: 6,921
joined: 8-5-2006
The problem I have with this thread is that Creationism and evolution aren't the same kind of theory and therefore how can they really be compared?
i will also like to know you the more
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:03AM
reconjsh at 9:47PM, March 28, 2007
(online)
posts: 663
joined: 12-18-2006
Atom Apple
The problem I have with this thread is that Creationism and evolution aren't the same kind of theory and therefore how can they really be compared?
Good point. But, people are doing it anyways. Creationism is being passed off as “the science that evolution is wrong about and the science of how God created everything 6k years ago”.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:02PM
shisno15 at 7:39PM, March 29, 2007
(online)
posts: 184
joined: 2-8-2006
I not trying to force anything on anyone here, I'm not a big religious person, this is just my views.

I saw a demonstration once where two random people got called up, I was one of them, the other was my friend. He explained that each of us were going to be given 1 simple task, put together a cheap 25 piece puzzle. I was thinking in my head “Ok, so what big deal”. My friend and I looked at each other like what does this guy think were stupid. Then he annoced that he wasn't finshed. He looked at me and said that I couldn't put it together, I had to put all the pieces in the box turn it upside down and hope that the puzzle came out done. My friend could put it together like normal. He had us start I did it about 20 times before my friend finished his puzzle (I wasn't really expecting to ever get it my way.) He then explained that my method was simalar to evolution nothing was there and then instantly it was (it didn't work) and my friend was creation he got to spend time on his puzzle and finally he got it perfect. We both walked away that day with a new perpsective on things.

Again I'm not trying to force my opinion on anyone. Feel free to try this example if you want.

But isn't it also true that god created and planed evolution?
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:34PM
subcultured at 12:00AM, March 30, 2007
(online)
posts: 5,392
joined: 1-7-2006
Creation science bases it's knowledge on the bible. They want to prove that the bible is right. The bible says god created the world in 7 days, it's wrong. some people say maybe days mean something else…so why was it written “days”. inconsistancy in the bible proves that what creationist are doing is trying to bend and stretch it. it doesn't make good science. you can't stretch out 1+1=3, or DNA sequences, or 2 hydrogen + O= water.

creation science is no science at all because of its source and how it is proven wrong in reality.

Maybe there is a divine bieng that planned and created the universe, but you can't find him in a text with old stories. Stories that was created to help humans coexist in a society. it's not scientific. it's like the children's song “ring around the rosie” it tells of the symptoms of the plague that was taught to children to help them be safe.

if you open up this pandora's box of teaching creation science to children, it's going to cause a chain reaction of fake healers and fake prophets. you don't have to prove why it works, it just does. a lot of people will die and lose hope because of this.
J
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:01PM
WingNut at 1:58AM, March 30, 2007
(offline)
posts: 747
joined: 10-13-2006
A little bit of assigned reading for everyone in this thread.

http://objectiveministries.org/creation/.

An interesting look at the arguments of creation science, posted on a website militantly advocating jesus riding a dinosaur.

-W
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:50PM
mechanical_lullaby at 4:28AM, March 30, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,905
joined: 1-7-2006
shisno15
I not trying to force anything on anyone here, I'm not a big religious person, this is just my views.

I saw a demonstration once where two random people got called up, I was one of them, the other was my friend. He explained that each of us were going to be given 1 simple task, put together a cheap 25 piece puzzle. I was thinking in my head “Ok, so what big deal”. My friend and I looked at each other like what does this guy think were stupid. Then he annoced that he wasn't finshed. He looked at me and said that I couldn't put it together, I had to put all the pieces in the box turn it upside down and hope that the puzzle came out done. My friend could put it together like normal. He had us start I did it about 20 times before my friend finished his puzzle (I wasn't really expecting to ever get it my way.) He then explained that my method was simalar to evolution nothing was there and then instantly it was (it didn't work) and my friend was creation he got to spend time on his puzzle and finally he got it perfect. We both walked away that day with a new perpsective on things.

Again I'm not trying to force my opinion on anyone. Feel free to try this example if you want.

But isn't it also true that god created and planed evolution?

I dunno about that one. There are some misunderstandings about evolution that people don't realize.
1. It didn't happen all at once. It's a slow change over thousands of years.
2. It's not meant to be perfect. The reason why things die out is that their current physical state cannot handle the pressure that is put on them. The gene is a mutation that doesn't take effect usually until two of the same species mate and produce an offspring. Which takes soo much longer than people realize. It's why scientists usually have these tests on beetles and other insects because change is much easier to see in animals with low life and high reproduction rates. So, yes, it is like a puzzle being tossed because it's completely random.

But you're also contradicting yourself there a little. God created and planned evolution, however it's random and will never get anything right because it doesn't work.
You're great to have your own opinions, though.

They have a class called religions which teaches mainstream religions and the class is usually about 90% christians who all have different views on their christianity. Creationism is just a small portion of the teaching. It is necessary for people to learn about more religions than just their own. It's selfish to say otherwise. And these days, if you want to get a degree in it, you'll probably get one.
With science classes teaching a small portion of evolution in their lesson plans. And the ability to get a degree pertaining to the subject… I don't know what else to say on the matter.
People can do anything they want, of course. It be better to be learned about the subjects first. Both of them.


PS… this thread is still going on… wow.

last edited on July 14, 2011 1:57PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved