Thread: vitalism vs mechanism (Creationist vs Evolution)

Grumble Grumble Grumble

Originally Posted by Eiden

hm? well thats interesting maybe you should read something
"Case for Creator" by Lee Strobel
it shows what the top scientist in the world think of evolution, its rather interesting to hear what they have to say. for its truly hard to tell someone about how misleading evolution really is unless you dont have some type of college credit.

At the same time, Philosophers, and learned men of religion have been trying for centuries to come up with a logical argument to prove the existent of God, and the only thing that they been able to prove is that the only safe position to take is the agnostic one. So from a logical point of view, religion is no better... At least with Evolution, the scientific community is SUPPOSE TO DISCUSS IT, including possible flaws and corrections to the current idea.

hm? well thats interesting maybe you should read something
"Case for Creator" by Lee Strobel
it shows what the top scientist in the world think of evolution, its rather interesting to hear what they have to say. for its truly hard to tell someone about how misleading evolution really is unless you dont have some type of college credit.

Yes your going to always find top scientist that have trouble with evolution. Scientist are human and some are religious. Just as you find scientist againat evolution, you'll find just as many for it.

Originally Posted by LenMiyata

Grumble Grumble Grumble

At the same time, Philosophers, and learned men of religion have been trying for centuries to come up with a logical argument to prove the existent of God, and the only thing that they been able to prove is that the only safe position to take is the agnostic one. So from a logical point of view, religion is no better... At least with Evolution, the scientific community is SUPPOSE TO DISCUSS IT, including possible flaws and corrections to the current idea.

I understand, your logic, it appears that on this voluntary basis neither side well be fully understood

Originally Posted by manga fanatic

well i think there is a god i think that we did evovle beacuse there is proof of evolution and no one has any refernces (except the bible ) of god making life

there really is almost no evidence that supports the theory of evolution in the degree that science passes off as true. only on the microscopic level do we see anything of the like.

in fact, the existence of magic has more proof than the possibility of one species becoming another.

Originally Posted by manga fanatic

well i think there is a god i think that we did evovle beacuse there is proof of evolution and no one has any refernces (except the bible ) of god making life

Well I guess that is partly true... but the way everything was created is too perfect to just be evolutionized the way they say it did . Out of all the atoms , molecules and stuff that was in the atmosphere, how coincidental that they all happen to form the right bonds to start life. There was a greater force behind it , because its just too perfect to be made spontaneously.

Grumble Grumble Grumble

Originally Posted by fayt lingod

there really is almost no evidence that supports the theory of evolution in the degree that science passes off as true. only on the microscopic level do we see anything of the like.

in fact, the existence of magic has more proof than the possibility of one species becoming another.

Actually, there is great amount of evidence for evolution, (but they don't teach this in high schools). The concept of genetic evolution is so fundemental to the Bio-Tech industry, that is some kind of evolutionary process did not occur, then the success with bio-engineered plants and animals, and the break-throughs in the pharmacutical industry simply should not have occurred...

Creationism should not be included in schools for the simple fact that it is not a true science, it does not abide by the scientific method, you cannot test it, and there is no evidence for it. The entire subject of creationism can be taught in less than a paragraph. It is a religious concept and the seperation of church and state should remain as is.

A very good analogy was made by someone and I wish I knew who they were. Supposing there was a puzzle, and creationism was represented as a little girl with an icecream cone, whereas evolution was represented by a basket with puppies in it.

As mankind has learned and discovered more and more he has found more and more pieces to this puzzle. At this point in time the puzzle is anything but finished, but a lot of it is indeed done. Looking at the puzzle as a whole you can easily make out parts of the puppies such as a paw here, a tail there, 2/3rd of a head there, you can see the makings of the basket and the blanket which the puppies lie on. However the fact of the matter is the puzzle is not yet complete. And while pieces are still being found every now and then (new evidence) some pieces have been forever lost. Another problem is inside the box the puzzle came in is a piece of paper which shows a picture of a girl with an ice cream cone, the paper claims that is what the puzzle should look like when completed.

Creationists point to the picture and claim that until the puzzle is 100% complete, the answer to the puzzle is obviously a girl with an ice cream cone. Those who support evolution point to the partially completed puzzle and point out that puppies and the makings of a basket can very clearly be seen.

And since the puzzle will never be completed because of the lost pieces, this arguement is likely to never cease. That is Evolution vs. Creationism.