evolution vs. creation?

Question

techincally, in order for something to be science, it has to be measurable and repeatable. Nobody can measure or repeat creation but we teach it as religion and we dont talk about it in public schools however evolution cannot be measured or repeated yet we teach it as science. Shouldnt we teach both as religion and shouldnt we teach both in public schools as equally possible instead of pretty much forcing the children to accept evolution? what do you think?

Answer 1

Unfortunately what most people do not understand is that theories are not measurable or repeatable.

Evolution is not measurable or repeatable.

To make this simple, lets say that I have a theory that it is impossible for a human to fly. I then take a person to the top of a cliff and toss the person off. I have just proven that it is impossible for a person to fly.

Someone postulates that the utilization of some form of wings will make it possible for people to fly.

I have many different people create many different forms of wings and I toss all of them off the cliff.

Many of them die. Some end up with broken bones. Some are very lucky and live. I have proven that it is impossible for a person to fly.

The experiment is measurable and repeatable, however, the theory is invalid. The experiments do not prove that the theory is correct, each individual experiment only proves that under specific conditions human flight is impossible.

If we experiment enough, we can prove that under specific conditions predicted by the theory specific things will happen. The problem is that we can never prove a theory through experimentation, we can only increase the probability of the correctness of the theory, until the theory becomes invalid.

If you research the theory that the mass of an object becomes greater as the velocity increases (Einstein) you will find that his theory predicts that light has no mass. Unfortunately light has momentum and lasers have a recoil, something that Einstein's theory fails to predict.

When you can reproduce an experiment that invalidates a popular theory usually people make up a bunch of reasons why the theory must be accurate. Eventually people blow enough holes in the theory that it goes away.

This happened with faster than sound flight and trans sonic vibration. We knew that solid objects could move faster than the speed of sound, but, the prevailing theory was that no one could put together a machine capable of staying together through trans sonic vibration. People eventually proved that wrong.

Same thing with the whole moon thing, people have valid theories with repeatable experiments that prove it is impossible for people to wear and move around in space suits. Of course they use higher pressures in their experiments then they use in space suits, but, the experiments are repeatable and measurable.

You need to understand that experimentation only proves the repeatability of specific conditions predicted by theories. Experimentation does not "prove" a theory.

It is only possible to disprove a theory, you cannot "prove" a theory. Even our 'scientific laws" are only theories with a very high degree of probability of accuracy. Gravity for example.

Just because we cannot prove a theory does not invalidate it. We can experiment under the specific conditions predicted by the theory and increase the probability until we do an experiment, as with Einstein, where we get incorrect results. If the theory, like Einstein's or evolution, has become a religion people will fight to keep the theory even with contradictory evidence.

It is kind of funny actually, because once evolution was the upstart theory being denied and Creationism the prevalent theory. Inquisitors are always on the "popular", politically correct, side.

Answer 2

Actually evolution can and has been measured, repeated and observed.

In life that goes through several thousand generations relatively fast, such as insects and bacteria, evolutionary benefits have been observed.

The most notable of these observations was probably the discovery of bateria that eats nylon byproducts that didn't exist until 80 years ago. When the bacteria's DNA was analysed it was discovered that a mutation had resulted in the gain of the appropriate enzymes to metabolise nylon waste.

Conversely, there hasn't ever been any substantial proof or observation of creation ever happening again or anything to back up any particular beliefs such as this.

As one person has already said, even if it was taught in schools you would only complain when you find out that ALL forms of creationism would have to be taught to make it "fair" - Christianity isn't the only religion ya know.

Answer 3

I'll bet when you do sudoku puzzles (IF you _can_ do any puzzles at all which require logical thinking) that you do them in pencil, and when you do, they're riddled with erasings.

I do sudokus and cryptic crosswords in pen because I *think* and don't draw conclusions until I have the facts or answers. I don't make mistakes because I apply rational arguments and rules of evidence to the situation, something _all_ thinking people do. You dont, as evidenced by your "question".

For you to even mention the cretinism of creationism shows that you don't know the first thing about rational thought, never mind science, and that you are not fit to discuss the topic. You are a perfect example of what is wrong with schools today: they teach people _what_ to think instead of _how_ to think.

Do everyone a favour, including yourself: learn how to think, THEN read a science book. If claim to already have done both, then it's obvious that you didn't "get it".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic
http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/
http://users.tpg.com.au/users/tps-seti/baloney.html
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html
http://www.chem1.com/acad/sci/pseudosci.html

Somehow, though, it wouldn't surprise if you find _this_ page too difficult:

http://comp.uark.edu/~mpianal/philosophy_basic_logic.html


.

Answer 4

What you describe as science is a actually scientific experiments, experiments and theories are two different thing. A theory explains why the results of experiment happen. Evolution explains way certain species have similar genetics, because the have a common ancestor. Which means that the species change slowly over time.
However creationism isn't even a scientific theory. Technically creationism can't even be considered until God existence is prove.

Answer 5

Evolution can be demonstrated in an accelerated form of experimentation, at the cellular and biochemical levels. Science, even with its limitations,is the only reliable form of knowledge we have. Its accomplishments have been beneficial to us and they cannot be denied.
Unfortunately, we have to contend with the superb power of myth. It is a powerful force, that can only be countered in small steps, for centuries.
We are not there yet, but we are making progress.
It took a while to learn that the Earth was not flat, that the Earth rotates around the Sun and that seizures are not cured by exorcism.
We still have some creationists dancing with serpents on Sunday rituals.
It will take a little more time for the true enlightment to arrive.

Answer 6

Evolution can be measured (see Grants' research concerning Darwin's finches in the Galapagos Islands...read The Beak of the Finch by Jonathan Weiner).

Scientific hypotheses must give rise to predictions....let's try that on Genesis.

Since the 99% of the water on the planet is seawater, global flooding would contaminate all freshwater and mix all the oceans.

Prediction 1 : All freshwater fish went extinct at the time of Noah's flood.

Prediction 2 : There should be no biogeographic differences in the distribution of fish in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.

Gee, those predictions don't hold water. Genesis is, therefore, disproven.

QED

Answer 7

1) Evolution has been tested and repeated with quickly reproducing species such as fruit flies and certain plants.

2) No, we shouldn't teach both as religion. Have you not heard of the Establishment Clause?

3) Yes, children should accept evolution. Denying fact is foolish!

4) You're obviously biased towards creationism, the Christian way probably. Why not teach Flying Spaghetti Monster creationism? The ancient Nordic belief we were created from trees?

Answer 8

I think you are incorrect when you said "technically, in order for something to be science, it has to be measurable and repeatable". How then can science begin to measure that which is immeasurable and non-repeating? I think you limit science exploration by saying things have to be measurable to be scientifically studied.

Personally, I have hope for science, that one day they can explain how creation is correct and so is evolution ... so I'll not limit their thinking, but encourage their independent thought, even if right now they completely disagree with my theories.

As to your question on what we should teach our students, my response remains as always .... teach them everything. Teach them as much as you can cram into their brains without frying the neural network lol. Load them with knowledge, make them powerful so they can find the answers we have failed to find in our generation :)

Answer 9

I wouldn't say evolution is not a religion. But I do think you have a point. When it comes to our origins, there is no mechanism to explain how we came to be. So the origin debate needs to be left out of science, since evolution fails the exact criteria it uses to exclude creationism. Repeatable, testable, and falsifiable.

Also why does everyone say fruit flies and viruses? Those have nothing to do with proving our origins. No one can disagree with evolution the process, but just because a car can go from 0-60 in 6 seconds does not mean it can go from 0-600 in 60 seconds. And it still does not explain the origin at all.

Answer 10

The evidence for evolution is and has been interpreted from a Philosophical and ideological Bias, The answers given by adherents to Evolution here in R&S is proof of the bias and agenda, Atheism has to have an alternate explanation—other than a Creator—for how the universe and life came into existence.
Darwin once identified himself as a Christian but as a result of some tragedies that took place in his life, he later renounced the Christian faith and the existence of God. Evolution was invented by an atheist.
What is sad is that Christians are falling into this Trap and trying to fit evolution into the Bible (Theistic Evolution) thinking they can make it fit.
Lee Stroble in his video listed below “ The Case for the Creator” stated (5 min. 28 sec into the video) The Case for a Creator
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajqH4y8G0MI


That “There is no way you can Harmonize Neo Darwinism with Christianity, I could never understand Christians who would say “ Well I believe in God yet I believe in Evolution as well” You see Darwin’s idea about the development of life led to his theory that modern science now generally defines as an undirected process completely devoid of any purpose or plan,”. Now how could God direct an undirected process? How could God have purpose in a plan behind a system that has no plan and no purpose? It just does not make sense.
It didn’t make sense to me in 1966 and it doesn’t make sense to me now.
The Apostle Paul wrote to His Son Timothy stating that “ in 2 Timothy 4:3-4 “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, [because] they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn [their] ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.”

Those Christians who believe in evolution have no idea how that effects their theology.
What is theistic evolution?
http://www.gotquestions.org/theistic-evolution.html


Eternity is a Long Time to be wrong about this

What Hath Darwin Wrought?
http://www.whathathdarwinwrought.com/

Darwin's Deadly Legacy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qHb3uq1O0Q
Darwin & Eugenics....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuTPHvedOOU&feature=related

Creation In The 21st Century - Planet Earth Is Special 1 of 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyUjhgsEJFw

Creation in the 21st Century - The Evidence Disputes Darwin 1 of 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbCbfzmhAN8

Some modern scientists who have accepted the biblical account of Creation
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/bios/

More than 600 Scientist with PHD’s who have Signed A SCIENTIFIC DISSENT FROM DARWINISM
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?id=660