Isn't evolution a religion of it's own?

Question

I've seen a lot of people mocking faith in a creator and faith in general. I can understand that. What I can't understand is how particles to people evolution requires any less faith. There is no more proof of the Big Bang Theory than the 6 days of Creation Theory. None of us were there. There are no pictures. No written record. It seems to me both require a certain amount of faith, just in different things. There are scientists (and yes I used the word the scientists) on both sides of the debate.

I know the Big Bang Theory is seperate from evolution but in terms of "beliefs" they are linked.

For the one who asked-Creation Scientists.
From answersingenisis.org
Note: Individuals on this list must possess a doctorate in a science-related field. If you would like to be included on this list, please see our inclusion procedure.

Dr. Paul Ackerman, Psychologist
Dr. E. Theo Agard, Medical Physics
Dr. James Allan, Geneticist
Dr. Steve Austin, Geologist
Dr. S.E. Aw, Biochemist
Dr. Thomas Barnes, Physicist
Dr. Geoff Barnard, Immunologist
Dr. Don Batten, Plant physiologist, tropical fruit expert
Dr. John Baumgardner, Electrical Engineering, Space Physicist, Geophysicist, expert in supercomputer modeling of plate tectonics
Dr. Jerry Bergman, Psychologist
Dr. Kimberly Berrine, Microbiology & Immunology
Prof. Vladimir Betina, Microbiology, Biochemistry & Biology
Dr. Raymond G. Bohlin, Biologist
Dr. Andrew Bosanquet, Biology, Microbiology
Edward A.

there are more listed

Answer 1

Faith is defined as belief without evidence. There are large amounts of evidence for both evolution and the Big Bang Model. Perhaps you just need to see some of the evidence for yourself. I suggest reading science books rather than creationist web sites.

By the way proof is what mathematicians and logicians do. Science does not deal with proof it deals with evidence. Scientific theories make predictions or retrodictions. Evidence is then sought as to whether those predictions are met or not. If the Predictions are not met the theory is falsified. Evolution has met the tests of literally tens of thousands of seperate predictions or retrodictions and has never been falsified. The Big Bang model has met the tests of hundreds of seperate predictions or retrodictions.

Answer 2

Saying there are scientists on both side of the evolution debate is like saying there are scientists on both sides of the flat earth debate. More then 99% of scientists in related fields accept evolution. And there is much more proof of the Big Bang then Creationism. In fact, just last year a bunch of American scientists won a Nobel prize in physics for finding substantial amount of more evidence for the Big Bang. No creation scientists has ever found any legitimate evidence for the 6 day theory.

Answer 3

Somebody can tell me the world is a ball and not a flat disk. I believe it because I trust the veracity of the person. But I could also take the effort to make measurements and observations myself, I could study it, and I will come to the same conclusion, but in the latter case it is solid knowledge. As it is very impractical to study everything myself, I have to place trust that what other people find out through their own study is correct. But as long as I know that I can test those facts and will most likely come up with the same answer I would not classify this as equivalent to a religious belief. Or do you belief the world is round like you belief in god?

Nobody found yet proof that god exists which hold up to any scientific criteria, not any of your scientists. God can not be analyzed using scientific methods. Science doesn't even say god doesn't exist, it just says it's something which is not accessible to scientific study and is not necessarily to explain the functioning of the world around us. Your question shows that you haven't understood the difference between science and religion and so you have to study more if you want to understand it.

Answer 4

The Big Bang Theory is based on massive evidence, that is why it is a well established scientific theory. Just because you are incredibly ignorant of that evidence does not make it all go away.

Science follows the evidence, ALL the evidence, wherever it leads. The pitifully few Creation 'scientists' are not scientists as they come up with their comic-book-version-of-the-bible conclusions in advance, then cherry-pick snippets of evidence. Like you, with your 'none of us were there' argument, they are deceiving themselves.

And by the way, that I know of on that list, Steve Austin, is also a shameless liar and fraudster.

Answer 5

Actually, there is evidence of the Big Bang (and no, I'm not an atheist). When Hubble proposed the Big Bang, he wasn't just sitting in his laboratory to just suddenly get the thought "Gee, I think that everything in the universe was concentrated in one place at one time, and then it all expanded into what we have today!" First, he observed everything in the universe gradually moving away from everything else---i.e. everything was expanding. Then, the speed of everything's movement was calculated to determine when the Big Bang happened. There is more, but since I am not a physicist, I cannot go too deeply into this.

Evolution does not require faith. There is a lot of evidence supporting it---contrary to what the creationists like to say. So, I don't think I would consider it a matter of faith. To put it bluntly, it just happens whether we want to accept it or not.

If it helps, we could think of evolution and the Big Bang (as I do) as God's way of creating everything.

Answer 6

Scientists don't acknowledge a debate. A debate requires conflicting arguments. 'It takes faith because no one saw it' is not an argument. Indeed you'll find that the vast majority of support for creationism manifests itself as attacks on evolution. Even if it were somehow demonstrated that evolution were false, that wouldn't support creationism.

Incidentally, the Big Bang has nothing to do with the Theory of Evolution.

Answer 7

Evolution is science, not Faith. The evidence is overwhelming.

As a Christian who accepts evolution, I think I’m in a pretty good position to understand the difference. My understanding of science has absolutely no sway one way or the other on my relationship with the Spirit of God.

Answer 8

No, it's not. Did you know that religious people are on both sides of the debate, too? I'm Pagan and I believe in it. The head of the Human Genome Project, Francis S. Collins, is a Christian who acknowledges evolution.

Answer 9

Both Creation and Evolution require a certain amount of faith, but to have faith in something doesn't necessarily mean it is your religion.

I have faith that when I go home today my house will still be there, but that doesn't mean it's my religion.

Answer 10

No, the premises of macro-evolution is fact. It has even been recreated in a lab on several less complex species, no faith required. Even most religious people accept evolution at this point, you would have to be close-minded not to..