Creation Or Evolution? Vote!

[Judoc 3]

Please state your definitions of creation and evolution, you might be wrong, I might be wrong, but since this is the debate, their definitions need to be said.

I quite agree. No sense debating if you aren't on the same page.

Evolution: A natural process which leads to new forms of beings. It is based on the principle of natural selection. Random mutations in DNA lead to slight variations in organisms. These variations, if helpful, result in creatures with the new DNA thriving, and the trait becomes more and more common. As this occurs many times throughout eons, in combination with geographic seperation, speciation occurs once so many minor changes in DNA have occurred the new creature and the old cannot interbreed.

Creation: A conjecture typically based on ancient superstition, relying typically on deities, aliens, or flying pasta, stating that all the evidence for evolution is somehow a hoax or a conspiracy, typically stating creatures magically appeared near or in their current forms. I speak here of New Earth creationism, of course, referring to a literal or near literal interpretation of ancient mytholoogies. (I am sorry I could not seperate bias from this definition. Not really though.)

[Judoc 3]

Things have to be LIVING to evolve dude. If the first human couldn't fit the environment, then he couldn't evolve to where he could live in it.

There really was no "First Human" Evolution is a gradual process taking place over eons. The common ancestor of all organisms would not have resulted in more organisms unless it could survive on Earth. Why it could, well, that's not the question here. New organisms evolving from this ancestor had to have helpful mutations to survive to outbreed it. Only the organisms with helpful mutations that could survive, survived.

Evolution does not state that humans randomly appeared and evolved to fit there environment. Rather, gradual mutation and natural selection of now-extinct organisms led to the diversity of flora and fauna we see in the world today. Tiny, tiny changes add up to evolution, not a single stage change from, for example, Homo Habilus to Homo Sapiens. (I realize these species didn't even directly precede each other, but Homo Habilus is, I believe, an ancestor of modern humanity.)

[Korvic 930]

I believe in both evolution, and creation. To an extent. There are many things wrong with evolution, and things have considerably slowed down. However, everything had to start somewhere in order to evolve, where was that somewhere? My dad has a very intresting point of view on this topic, being a Christian that knows his bible back and forth, he has quite intresting ideas on the matter.

He believes that the '6 days' to make the earth, refered to in the bible, is not 144 standard hours. This earth has been around for billions of years. So if our earth has been here for about 4.53 to 4.58 billion years old. Then that means that every approx. 1.4 billion years could be one of these days. We seem to only be able to date back certain animals to one date, and no further. If you notice that scientists can date creatures from the water further back than most land mammals? Even though water makes them decay faster? Also note that in the bible, the first animals made are birds and sea creatures. Then came land animals. (Including people). By this logic that means that 'God' is now resting, this is semi-logical reasoning to why God will not show himself. I can't go into great detail, that is all I vaguely remember. If you wanted a full explanation I would have to get him to do it instead of me.

I have heard my dad explain this many times, and every time he does, it may not make sense the way I tried, but it does when he explains it. This makes me definitively believe there is something that has created things. However, I do not believe in the new testament of the bible what so ever, and I do not agree with the majority of the ways the bible is interpreted. I am not a Christian in that respect. My view on the religions around the bible are almost null. I do not take the words of the book word for word as I believe it could very well be a 'Based on a true story.' book. Some things will be right, some exaggerated, etc, etc.

That is just my opinion, if enough people want my dad to give a full explication of what I desperately tried to do, I may ask him to write about it. Thanks for reading my opinion. I respect everyone having their own, and this is mine. ^w^

[KoTo 610]

God created the process of evolution, which made us. Done.

Aye.This.

[Cassius 32]

Wow, Why is this topic even opened up.

Seriously... There are other forums on the net for this. A gaming site filled with intelligent people and impressionable minds is seriously not the place for a religious debate...

[OSD 10]

So evolution – just as creation – is only a model used to explain the observations in the world as we know it. It is not a fact, not a natural law, not even a scientific theory, but just a model!

No, sorry, but no, this might have been correct in the 90's when the scientific community really tried to reach out by trying to use lay terms. The very existence of scientific models are based upon theories (know the model for forecasting weathers? yep, based on theories in meteorology :P) Evolution is a theory under the current framework, would really appreciate it if no more misinformation get sent out (ahem, like obsolete terms such as micro+macro evolution).

@Oseric & others

I've given up on derick ages ago, seems like a really young person that haven't learned some aspects of a lot of things, especially the topic at hand. We might hopefully have a good debate in a few years.

@Korvic

sounds like your dad is trying to explain his own version of old earth creationism (unless you are explaining it wrong and you are trying to explain theistic evolution). In either cases, doesn't sounds like he's rejecting evolution. We really need a theistic evolution option for selection :V

@abiogenesis

This topic is about evolution and creationism, not abiogenesis vs creationism (keep drifting and we might end up with 12 step guide of superstitions vs 5 steps on how to start your own mormon religion and your private harem). Although it'll take science a few more decades to work out and get some actual data on panspermia as well as observable reactions of cyanogen/similar inorgranic > organic groups that could become the first ancestor. Even then, certain religious groups will try to power grab/seek attention to their irrelevance while the rest of them will just go meh and enjoy the benefits while worshiping whatever that they worship along with the rest of the population.

@Cassius

This topic gets open up alot, that's why a lot of forums bans politic/religion/science (yes, proper science) talk. Although, exposing impressionable minds to some proper science (you really have to read some of the books they are using to teach in parts of the US and some private/religious schools in other parts of the world to fully appreciate this statement) can't really hurt. The OP might have been curious as to others' view, although it could've been a troll just hoping for a huge flamewar which thankfully won't happen.

[Nefarious Aus Shitpost 891]

I personally believe in Creation. But in all honesty, I think questions such as these are not meant to be answered or argued over.

I will not go into my personal beliefs as I have been too often flamed for them over the internet and while I don't pay attention to people I can't see it too often seeps back into my actual life.

[Space 2335]

This is like this;

I'm a unicorn. You cant say I'm not. Therefore, I'm a unicorn.

God exists. You can't say he doesn't. Therefore, god exists.

Golfwang

[Watyll 1104]

God created the process of evolution, which made us. Done.

I stated this earlier.

[Space 2335]

@Vaq That's like saying 'Zeus created evolution' There is no basis except for trying to rationalize it. Atleast creationists have a book. Evolutionists have scienctific basis.

[Watyll 1104]

Can you disprove god? No. Can you explain what started the big bang? No. The only 'rational' explanation is a divine being.

[Space 2335]

Using that logic, big bang is obviously the truth. No way to disprove it. But there -is- ways to disprove God.

Christianity just fills in the unsolved gaps in the universes history. It is, in a sense, the same as EVERY other religion.

Atheism is the neutral state of mind, just following whatever is most logical. 'SHABAM EXIST' isn't very logical.

Whatever, on iPhone and I know I can't persuade you, just as you can't persuade me.

[Whitebeard 126]

However, I do not believe in the new testament of the bible what so ever, and I do not agree with the majority of the ways the bible is interpreted. I am not a Christian in that respect.

Personally (As an Atheist) I find the New Testament to actually be a far better piece of reading material then the old testament. Jesus' moral teachings for the most part were wonderful, I'm not 100% why you don't believe in it. By not believing in the New Testament and Jesus Christ you are by definition no longer a christian.

God created the process of evolution, which made us. Done.

This neo-christianity, perfectly explains the flaws of religion and it's Creation assertions. Christians are now using science to further explain or rationalize their beliefs by using the popular "Big bang - God did it!, Evolution - God did it!, Earth - God did it" This is of course a null argument that provides not evidence or logic other then making assumptions with nothing to back them up.

Can you disprove god? No. Can you explain what started the big bang? No. The only 'rational' explanation is a divine being.

This is so wrong I don't even know where to begin. For one we don't need to DISPROVE god, it is the creationists that need to do the proving. This is the basis of a rational argument, without it, these debates cannot exist. You're right, we do not know for sure what started the big bang, but there are numerous theories that do not require the divine intervention you are suggesting.

And to finish off, the argument for believing in a god (or a higher power) is an irrational argument, so nothing rational explains gods existence.

So evolution – just as creation – is only a model used to explain the observations in the world as we know it. It is not a fact, not a natural law, not even a scientific theory, but just a model!

You're right they are both Models of sort, one a rational model, the other an irrational model. One model has evidence to support it, as do all scientific models, Creationism on the other hand, doesn't have ANY evidence to support it's argument.

[Narco 6]

Can you disprove god? No. Can you explain what started the big bang? No. The only 'rational' explanation is a divine being.

Ok, let me get this straight. You are saying that because both of the theories cannot be proven or even disproven, it is most rational to believe in something that completely contradicts everything you have ever lived and seen and touched? You have never seen anything "Divine" or "Magical happen. You have seen what everyone else has, but you say it's rational to go with a Divine being.

And by the way, evolution can be proven. I cannot personally prove it, but it can be proven. "God" can also be real. Maybe every time someone has reported that they say an angel, they just say aliens. Maybe God is an alien, and we are an experiment?

The point is: Nobody knows the answer.

To me, it is easier to believe the cold, hard facts. Evolution.

But "God" could easily exist.

[Dun_Irongut 104]

Ok, let me get this straight. You are saying that because both of the theories cannot be proven or even disproven, it is most rational to believe in something that completely contradicts everything you have ever lived and seen and touched? You have never seen anything "Divine" or "Magical happen. You have seen what everyone else has, but you say it's rational to go with a Divine being.

And by the way, evolution can be proven. I cannot personally prove it, but it can be proven. "God" can also be real. Maybe every time someone has reported that they say an angel, they just say aliens. Maybe God is an alien, and we are an experiment?

The point is: Nobody knows the answer.

To me, it is easier to believe the cold, hard facts. Evolution.

But "God" could easily exist.

That sums up my opinion quite well. Facts, regardless of their ill comfort, seem to be the way in which I look. I wish I could simply believe in God, but unless a God were to show himself at any point in time, I'd rather stick with what an extremely hefty majority of the science community believes.