Creationism vs. evolution

[Shredderbeam]

I don't think neither Evolution nor Creation should be taught in schools.

Why should we not teach science?

I won't argue with you.. The fact is, Something has always been here.. and thinking that it started with a piece of bacteria is more of a religion than a God

"God is our ignorance; science, our knowledge." Has it ever occured to you that our way of life is wrong? Our life is based off science.. but is it really science or is it right..?

There is direct evidence to show that the first life were simple, single-celled organisms. Can you provide evidence that God directly created life?

Is it really science...or is it right? What? Science produces direct, verifiable results. It is not some game that judges itself by its own standards, it has an actual, enormous impact on reality.

However, the evolution theory has evidence which backs it up, like how birds evolute etc, but the human part of it, where we apparantly were bacteria, the fish, then monkey's etc, fails in my opinion.

Argument from Personal Incredulity. Invalid argument.

God however, does exist, as there must have been something or someone, to create this/these universe(s).

Everything springs from something. There must be a root node.

What evidence do you have to demonstrate that God is the root node?

Nothing can't be created without a creator.

The same logic can be applied to God.

Science, might have found out that, the gasses and dust, exploded etc, and then planets came blabla, but there was a reason for that to happen. It doesn't exist by itself.

I don't think that anything could have caused the Big Bang. Causation implies time, which did not exist before the Big Bang.

You should look at islam, the quran has never been changed, and so many facts in it, have come true, which no1 could have ever predicted so long ago. All those stuff about how humans are inside and outside, how tectonic plates move, how mountains exist, and many many more topics that science has just discovered were already written in the quran, that alone proves its existence, you should do some research in your language about it, and find out for yourself.

Old. We've had our share of Quran-quoting "scientists" try to convert us. I can probably dig up the records if you like.

 

[d great one]

Creationism should be taught at school.

As for not everything can be explained through science.
Also so kids will have at least a few idea on where they came from.

Also in example, the Evolution theory by Charles Darwin, it is only a theory, as to still where did we came from is unexplainable. As to Charles Darwin's theory could never be right, or all monkeys would have been human by now.

 

[Shredderbeam]

Creationism should be taught at school.

As for not everything can be explained through science.

Everything can be explained through science, in principle. In practice, we're nearly there.

Also so kids will have at least a few idea on where they came from.

Let's not give them false ideas, hmm?

Also in example, the Evolution theory by Charles Darwin, it is only a theory, as to still where did we came from is unexplainable.

First of all, you're using the wrong definition of theory. The scientific definition is: A logically consistent amalgamation of facts, evidence, predictions, and explanations.

As to Charles Darwin's theory could never be right, or all monkeys would have been human by now.

Get out. You do not have enough understanding of the issue to debate it intelligently.

 

[Swan]

Creationism should be taught at school.

As for not everything can be explained through science.
Also so kids will have at least a few idea on where they came from.

Also in example, the Evolution theory by Charles Darwin, it is only a theory, as to still where did we came from is unexplainable. As to Charles Darwin's theory could never be right, or all monkeys would have been human by now.

You have not properly studied the theory of evolution, then. You probably don't even know the true definition of the word theory. Basically, a theory is something that is backed up by a coherent amount of information.

Not everything can be explained by Science practically, this much is correct. We can explain most things in theory and principle, though. However, this does NOT mean that everyone should just jump to the conclusion of an omniscient entity. I would rather not know and be searching for the answer, than irrationally believe in such garbage.

You are also wrong about Monkeys. There are different species of monkey, correct? By your logic, all monkeys should be of one type, rather than Chimpanzee, Gorilla, Orangutang and so on. Your argument is flawed. Correct your argument before you post anything else.

 

[The Sedical]

I love science, but science hasn't been here as long as religions, and no people didn't know anything that was written in the quran by that time, so no one could have made that up. Science, just shows how things happen, it doesn't explain everything fully. Its just mostly theories, which then get tested by other scienctist, and if a lot believe in them, they get accepted. There still isn't any physical proof for all theories.

We both agree that there must be a creator/creation for something. I say god created everything, and wanted to test us. Why should there be something to create god? It just doesn't make any sence whatsover. What if god decided to create the universe? Who stops him? Why should there be someone greater then him?

Not a valid point, there should be no "root nod" for god, there is no point in it.
If there was "one" why would he create god and let god create the universe? Why couldn't that "one" just do it himself?

 

[Shredderbeam]

I love science, but science hasn't been here as long as religions, and no people didn't know anything that was written in the quran by that time, so no one could have made that up. Science, just shows how things happen, it doesn't explain everything fully. Its just mostly theories, which then get tested by other scienctist, and if a lot believe in them, they get accepted. There still isn't any physical proof for all theories.

I don't know how much you know about science, but you should look into its real-world applications.

We both agree that there must be a creator/creation for something. I say god created everything, and wanted to test us. Why should there be something to create god? It just doesn't make any sence whatsover. What if god decided to create the universe? Who stops him? Why should there be someone greater then him?

Why is God the creator of the universe? What evidence do you have for this claim?

Not a valid point, there should be no "root nod" for god, there is no point in it.
If there was "one" why would he create god and let god create the universe? Why couldn't that "one" just do it himself?

If a God existed, he would be the root node. My argument is that your root node is unnecessarily complex. Occam's Razor applies.

 

[porman]

I love science, but science hasn't been here as long as religions, and no people didn't know anything that was written in the quran by that time, so no one could have made that up. Science, just shows how things happen, it doesn't explain everything fully. Its just mostly theories, which then get tested by other scienctist, and if a lot believe in them, they get accepted. There still isn't any physical proof for all theories.

So you think the gaps in our scientific knowledge is where god fits in? what about when these gaps keep getting filled. Theres no physical proof of gravity, you think gravity doesnt exist? theres no physical proof of the atomic theory, yet we can make nuclear reactors/bombs by using it, is the atomic theory incorrect? Science is paramount, Even if we have it all wrong, its still there, theres still a scientific reason for something, we just may have it wrong or dont know it yet. The laws of physics cannot change, only our understanding of them can.

I say god created everything, and wanted to test us. Why should there be something to create god? It just doesn't make any sence whatsover. What if god decided to create the universe? Who stops him? Why should there be someone greater then him?

Why would god create us just to test us? are you saying we are lab rats? we are for his ammusement? to see how we kill eachother? if not then explain. Even the very nature of the world is to kill or be killed. animals (including us) are designed for killing and eating other animals. what sort of sick test is this?

Also, doesnt god know everything? god should know what we would do if he created us and tested us, so why would he need to actually create us if he knows the answer? why cant he just automatically send us to heaven/hell. This testing phase is unnecessary if he already knows the answer. make sense of that.

 

[DropKick Murphys]

Creationism should be taught at school.

As for not everything can be explained through science.

Are you suggesting that because not everything can be explained (yet?) that we should make up answers for it? Because that is all creationism is, not being able to figure something and answering it by saying something like "magic man dun it"

 

[The Sedical]

Why is God the creator of the universe? What evidence do you have for this claim?

The evidence is the quran obviously, not one person nor a whole society could have written so many scientific facts back then. Dont come back saying again people knew all those stuff back then. If so why did science only find out about 50 years ago, about most stuff? Not just one example, everything about the earth, humans universe, the afterlife is explained with such great detail. Stories and events, that would happen only hunderds of years later were already written. Explain that.
Also, one example in the quran is , it explained that when a baby is born, god first creates the bones then the flesh on humans. Another example is that in the quran it already said that the earth was round. Now you can't ever argue that, because you know that people always thought that the earth was flat.

So you think the gaps in our scientific knowledge is where god fits in? what about when these gaps keep getting filled. Theres no physical proof of gravity, you think gravity doesnt exist? theres no physical proof of the atomic theory, yet we can make nuclear reactors/bombs by using it, is the atomic theory incorrect? Science is paramount, Even if we have it all wrong, its still there, theres still a scientific reason for something, we just may have it wrong or dont know it yet. The laws of physics cannot change, only our understanding of them can.



Why would god create us just to test us? are you saying we are lab rats? we are for his ammusement? to see how we kill eachother? if not then explain. Even the very nature of the world is to kill or be killed. animals (including us) are designed for killing and eating other animals. what sort of sick test is this?

Also, doesnt god know everything? god should know what we would do if he created us and tested us, so why would he need to actually create us if he knows the answer? why cant he just automatically send us to heaven/hell. This testing phase is unnecessary if he already knows the answer. make sense of that.

Before god created us, there were already angles created. Then 2 humans adam and eve, god gave them instructions, which they didn't follow therefore humankind got created, to see if we follow the instructions. You should really do your research before you event think... God gave us a choice, we can do good or bad, we are not forced to do something therefore, why would he automatically send us to hell/heaven, that would be unfair. At least this way, he can say, why we were send to heaven/hell.

your post absolutely didn't make any sense whatsoever.

 

[dies irae]

It shouldn't be taught.
I beileve in it. But I would not like to be forced to "learn about it"

 

[Jordan]

Evolution is a theory, yes. Gravity is also a theory.

No. Creationism should never be taught in schools. Ever. It is not science, at all.

I <3 you shredderbeam lmao, i like your thinking,

anyways yeah it isn't science.

 

[Shredderbeam]

The evidence is the quran obviously, not one person nor a whole society could have written so many scientific facts back then.

This has been discussed ad nauseum in this forum. All of the verses in the Quran that allegedly refer to scientific facts are extremely vague, and have to be interpreted in your favor. Of these, some are common sense (reflective moon), some were known since ancient times (roundness of the Earth), and some are false (mountains being required to stabilize the Earth's plates).

Also, one example in the quran is , it explained that when a baby is born, god first creates the bones then the flesh on humans.

"We made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh; then We developed out of it another creature."

Interesting - yet it is hardly a detailed description of the embryo's growth.

Another example is that in the quran it already said that the earth was round. Now you can't ever argue that, because you know that people always thought that the earth was flat.

It would seem that Aristotle realized this far before Mohamed:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Aristotle+round+earth&btnG=Search

 

[Personal Jesus]

The evidence is the quran obviously, not one person nor a whole society could have written so many scientific facts back then. Dont come back saying again people knew all those stuff back then. If so why did science only find out about 50 years ago, about most stuff? Not just one example, everything about the earth, humans universe, the afterlife is explained with such great detail. Stories and events, that would happen only hunderds of years later were already written. Explain that.
Also, one example in the quran is , it explained that when a baby is born, god first creates the bones then the flesh on humans. Another example is that in the quran it already said that the earth was round. Now you can't ever argue that, because you know that people always thought that the earth was flat.

The Quran is also the source - you can't use the source as evidence. That would be equivalent to me saying "I am God. Because I am God, this statement is absolutely true." - Do you see the flawed logic? And back to the facts, did you take the time to examine the links Shredderbeam gave you? Somehow, I doubt it - thus rendering your argument ignorant.

Before god created us, there were already angles created. Then 2 humans adam and eve, god gave them instructions, which they didn't follow therefore humankind got created, to see if we follow the instructions. You should really do your research before you event think... God gave us a choice, we can do good or bad, we are not forced to do something therefore, why would he automatically send us to hell/heaven, that would be unfair. At least this way, he can say, why we were send to heaven/hell.

your post absolutely didn't make any sense whatsoever.

I think you missed his/her point - if God has infinite knowledge, knows everything that has happened in the past and knows everything that will happen in the future, he would know whether or not we would sin and/or be good humans. On the other hand, if God DOESN'T know what our future will prevail, he does not have infinite knowledge.

 

[Runite_Ore]

I think you missed his/her point - if God has infinite knowledge, knows everything that has happened in the past and knows everything that will happen in the future, he would know whether or not we would sin and/or be good humans. On the other hand, if God DOESN'T know what our future will prevail, he does not have infinite knowledge.

I don't see the point in your argument. God knows if we will be good or bad, but we have the choice. God has no affect on whether we will or won't do something, God knows whether or not we will do it.

Say you gave a kid some broccoli and a lollipop. You know he's going to want the lollipop, but he still has the choice to choose either. Knowing what the child will obviously obtain, doesn't render his/her freewill useless. When the time come to make the decision, the child will. Such as we know the sun will rise tomorrow.

It doesn't mean our will isn't free. It means we can do as we please, but God knows of it ahead of time.

Why should we not teach science?

sci·ence /&#712;sa&#618;&#601;ns/ Pronunciation Key [sahy-uhns]
&#8211;noun
1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.~Dictionary.com

Science is what we know, you may "know" evolution is true, but I "know" it isn't. It's knowledge. The word "know" should be replaced with "believe". While Science is what we know, you believe evolution is true, while I believe it isn't. If we believe it's true, we don't know if it is.

So by not teaching evolution, we aren't teaching science. Same with Creationism. Since I believe it's true. So it's still not science.

The Quran is also the source - you can't use the source as evidence. That would be equivalent to me saying "I am God. Because I am God, this statement is absolutely true." - Do you see the flawed logic? And back to the facts, did you take the time to examine the links Shredderbeam gave you? Somehow, I doubt it - thus rendering your argument ignorant.

It is actually your argument which is ignorant. You failed to understand his/her comment and you replied from what little you understood. He said that the source (The Quran) Is full of evidence that renders Islam/Creationism true. While you thought he said "The Quran is full of science thats why it's true" For no one couldn't predicted/known all of such info, especially around 600AD+.

 

[Shredderbeam]

I don't see the point in your argument. God knows if we will be good or bad, but we have the choice. God has no affect on whether we will or won't do something, God knows whether or not we will do it.

God apparently created us, every single molecule and atom in our bodies, shaped their future courses, saw the entire future in all of its dimensions, and you say he is not responsible?

Say you gave a kid some broccoli and a lollipop. You know he's going to want the lollipop, but he still has the choice to choose either. Knowing what the child will obviously obtain, doesn't render his/her freewill useless. When the time come to make the decision, the child will. Such as we know the sun will rise tomorrow.

If you created every single particle of the child's body in a controlled environment, and set them off in such a way that you knew exactly how they would interact well into the future, then the child would only have the illusion of free will. It would not actually be free - that would require some sort of irreducible substance capable of free choice.

sci·ence /&#712;sa&#618;&#601;ns/ Pronunciation Key [sahy-uhns]
–noun
1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.~Dictionary.com

Science is what we know, you may "know" evolution is true, but I "know" it isn't. It's knowledge. The word "know" should be replaced with "believe". While Science is what we know, you believe evolution is true, while I believe it isn't. If we believe it's true, we don't know if it is.

So by not teaching evolution, we aren't teaching science. Same with Creationism. Since I believe it's true. So it's still not science.

How do we know truths about the universe? The best method is the scientific method:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Do you understand how this works? It was from this that the theory of evolution was developed. By teaching this, we are indeed teaching science.

 

[kher0]

Lol. U r funny guyz . How come 30 atheists are arguing 2gether and they all have the same opinion . For me , Everything should be taught in the right way , and let the student choose. But when u say No God , if there were God , blah blah blah . Then u r lying as u r giving ur point of view. Not other side point of view. So , Please stop making new threads about this every time u feel bored and then keep repeating urselves.

 

[Beatbox Is Life]

I think everything should be presented in school. They should teach evolutionism, and explain, "here is the most accepted theory". They show all the proof such as the common ancestor, fossil, etc etc.

Then they should teach creationism. They explain the idea of a supreme being. Then they explain that there is no proof and that you simply have to believe in it fully.

THEN they should also explain the seeder theory. They show the small amount of evidence and explain that the seeder theory is about half belief and half evidence.

Most of this is taught in high school. By high school, it usually doesn't matter what you present to a student because by then they will have already made up their mind on what they believe.


BTW
Seeder theory is that humans were planted here by aliens.

 

[Shredderbeam]

Then they should teach creationism. They explain the idea of a supreme being. Then they explain that there is no proof and that you simply have to believe in it fully.

If one mythology-based idea is taught in school, why not another?

 

[Personal Jesus]

I don't see the point in your argument. God knows if we will be good or bad, but we have the choice. God has no affect on whether we will or won't do something, God knows whether or not we will do it.

Say you gave a kid some broccoli and a lollipop. You know he's going to want the lollipop, but he still has the choice to choose either. Knowing what the child will obviously obtain, doesn't render his/her freewill useless. When the time come to make the decision, the child will. Such as we know the sun will rise tomorrow.

We can't know with a 100% certainty that the child will eat the lollipop. God would.

Science is what we know, you may "know" evolution is true, but I "know" it isn't. It's knowledge. The word "know" should be replaced with "believe". While Science is what we know, you believe evolution is true, while I believe it isn't. If we believe it's true, we don't know if it is.

Why do you believe evolution isn't true?

It is actually your argument which is ignorant. You failed to understand his/her comment and you replied from what little you understood. He said that the source (The Quran) Is full of evidence that renders Islam/Creationism true. While you thought he said "The Quran is full of science thats why it's true" For no one couldn't predicted/known all of such info, especially around 600AD+.

Yes, and the so-called evidence in the Quran was either already known to mankind before it was written, the other half has been disproven. If the Quran truly is the one source of God, there cannot be ANY mistakes in it - an omniscient and omnipotent deity wouldn't even make a simple typo or a spelling error. Let alone screw things up so intensely bad when it comes to the scientific parts, and the whopping hundreds of self-contradictions.

 

[Runite_Ore]

Omg I typed up an hour worth of response while the site was going slow and now it's gone.. I'll edit this posts and pretty much summarize as much as I can remember tomorrow..