Which concept has more evidence to support it: Evolution or Creationism?

Answer 1

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for creationism.

There is evidence for evolution.

The "theory" in "theory of evolution" does not mean just a good guess. The first definition of the word "theory" is: "A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena." http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theory

P.S. to the conventionally minded: Evolution does not rule out 'God'. It rules out only the lies told about 'God'.

Answer 2

Neither,there is no way to empirically prove either one.Proof has to be tested and results reproduced.
You will find most people on here that spout evolution really know nothing about it,all they know is talkorigin.com.The sight is there solely to give talking points to those who want to refute creationism.Archaeologists are ridiculed and their papers not even reviewed if they contradict the standing view.
It was well known among Archaeologists for a very long time that the evidence of men in North and South America predated the land bridge theory for men getting here after the ice age,but it was only refuted recently.Clovis was considered a type of man and many people still think that is so but the Clovis point was a piece of technology that science now knows was traded among many different people.There are those who think the Clovis point was brought here by Europeans as that the next closest technology to the Clovis point only appears in the French region of Europe.This considered impossible though it has been proved that the Inuit Indians travel the equivalent distances along ice flows while hunting.
No cut and paste here,just a functional Christian brain.

Answer 3

Well, evolution has none. Creation has the Bible (which is older than any scientist), evidence for the flood, the profound effect it has on peoples lives, the historical documents surrounding Christianity, the fact that the oldest artifact that can be positively dated is 5500 years old. I would vote for creation at this point. If you add speculation to the criteria, then anything goes.

Answer 4

What? There is no evidence for creationism. That's why they invented faith (the antithesis of reason). The only "arguments" they have are these retarded 'improbability' statements (i.e., what are the chances this molecule would come together with that molecule, etc). Evolution is an incomplete theory, but seriously, we are trying to solve a very complex problem with our little tiny monkey brains, and all the religious have to say is "God did it. Yep. God did it! Amen! Praise heeeem!"

P.S.

Retard quote of the day: "...things just don't happen all by themselves! Uh-huck!" Really? Did god happened all by himself? If you are going to believe in uncaused first causes there really are better candidates!

Answer 5

Evolution. Fossil evidence, antibiotic resistant bacteria, Australia (marsupials where widespread around the world at the time Australia separated from the rest of the world and the conditions changed everywhere and creatures evolved but in Australia the conditions remained the same and so the marsupials didn't evolve, same with Madagascar and lemurs).
creationism has no evidence to support it at all.
Say no to jesus.

Answer 6

Creationism
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/qa.asp

Answer 7

I want everybody to read this. First of all if evolution did happen then what made the big bang happen. What is the orgin to that? Creation is simple because it is complete unlike evolution. God created the heaven and the Earth and it is as simple as it is. Things cannot just happen on their own.

Answer 8

Creationism.

Answer 9

Since we have discovered that the fossil record gives no support to the idea of species gradually changing into other species, let us see if fossil evidence is in harmony with the Bible. Ten times in the book of Genesis we read God's decree concerning the reproduction of His creatures - "after its kind." The word "kind" refers to species, or families. Each created family was to produce only its own kind. This forever precludes the drifting, changing process required by organic evolution where one species turns into another.

And there are more just not enough space to list them, see link for more:

Answer 10

creationism There is just to many things that support a creator
The planet being the right place in the universe to support life
the right size the right size of a moon, the list is endless.
The single cell is so complex the chances of that happing randomly is astromonical. The same as a bunch of metal creating a blender if thrown in a cement mixer.
To not believe in a creator is not to know science as it really is.