Creation vs. Evolution

[H2Andy]

However, most evolutionists seem to revel in the belief that they have all the answers, or at least enough of them to conclude that any other belief is false.

regardless of how arrogant a proponent of evolution may be, let's stick to the facts:

i can show you thousands of different facts that support evolution.

all you have to do is show me ONE that negates evolution, and the whole thing comes crashing down

please bring forth that one fact

 

[gary-ramey]

"Intelligent design" is in no way scientific and I can see why Gould would be so critical that stuff like that would be allowed into a science class. It is NOT scientific and has NO place in a science class, especially as it requires a religious belief, something that should not be forced on the entire of the population at the whims of a few. That is the answer to your question 'why?'.

Sure it is. It is a theory like others with some supporting evidence..ie DNA encoding. You profess to know something about computers. Programs can often be very complex for even the most simple operation. The master gene designed to grow a human ear does just that even when planted into a rat.

 

[sheck33]

You mean, you don't think so? There is a theory. Some or all of the basic mechanisms identified by that theory have been observed. The theory and observations seem to fit but I'm not sure we have observations or direct evidence that confirm the theory and observed mechanisms accounts for the complexity and diversity of all life that exists.

If it did, study could stop now. Not demonstrated.Not demonstrated.

The point I was trying to make is the fact that just because a theory is not complete means that we need a god to explain the rest i.e. god of the gaps.

How do we not have direct evidence evolution takes place? I thought we established that we do.

Please explain how a god is necessary to explain the universe exists.

Besides, I really do not think saying 'God did it' explains anything.

 

[H2Andy]

It is a theory like others with some supporting evidence

creationism is not a scientific theory because it is not capable of being disproven

no one can disprove God created the universe ... or to put it another way, no one can prove God DIDN'T create the universe

as a theory, creationism is not capable of being disproven, thus it is not a scientific theory, unlike evolution

again, to disprove evolution, all you have to do is find a mammal fossil in a Cambrian fossil bed. good luck.

 

[Sas]

Sure it is. It is a theory like others with some supporting evidence..ie DNA encoding.

Can't be bothered rephrasing this in my own words. Read these and respond to EACH point please, if you want to be taken seriously. CI001: Intelligent Design as Science
CI001.4: Intelligent Design and peer review
CI100: Intelligent Design
CI141: Similar form, similar designer?
CI002: Explanatory power of intelligent design

You profess to know something about computers. Programs can often be very complex for even the most simple operation. The master gene designed to grow a human ear does just that even when planted into a rat.

What does that have to do with anything talked about here?

 

[gary-ramey]

all you have to do is show me ONE that negates evolution, and the whole thing comes crashing down

please bring forth that one fact

Fine. But let's set up the ground rules. Microevolution isn't a debate..ie changes within a species. Furthermore, I'm not out to disprove evolution. I'm simply going to point out weaknesses in the argument that would require additional discovery to be proven true beyond a reasonable doubt. A fact has to be defined as having no alternative explanation or definition. Let's keep it civil.
Feel free to edit these....I'm turning in for the evening. BTW, why don't you start with a simple fact of evolution. Ie transitional species etc.

 

[gary-ramey]

Quote:
You profess to know something about computers. Programs can often be very complex for even the most simple operation. The master gene designed to grow a human ear does just that even when planted into a rat.

What does that have to do with anything talked about here?

the gene was "designed" to grow the ear?

BTW...do you have the ability to articulate an argument yourself without pointing to and obviously biased website?

 

[Sas]

'm turning in for the evening. BTW, why don't you start with a simple fact of evolution. Ie transitional species etc.

This is SO insulting to the people in this thread that have taken the time to frequently post evidence of the facts of evolution. Stop being intellectually lazy and DO SOME READING! Until then, stop talking like you understand the issues involved please.

 

[Sas]

the gene was "designed" to grow the ear?

And? What is your point? Humans can make designer species, how does that prove that overall, everything was designed? Please make that connection for me.

 

[AXL72]

....you don't have near the fossil record to document all, or even most of, these tiny changes.

Hey, no one has ever found a fossil of God...so hey, God must not exist, right?