Do you believe in the theory of evolution or in the thoery of creationism? Why?

Question

I'm a student and am caught between whether I believe in the thoery of evolution or creationism. I know there are legitimate facts to prove each one, but I would be interested to hear your thoughts. I know that it is possible to believe in both and I think that that is where i am at right now.

Answer 1

The whole debate is ridiculous. The problem is very few people research the topic. They listen to discovery channel and they believe evolution is possible. That accounts for probably 95% of people who believe evolution is possible. What I did was I opened my mind to evolution, I researched the possibilities and found no absolute proof. ( I didnt do my research based on the discovery channel). Then, most people who believe in evolution were angry saying if I wanted proof I should be a lawyer and not be interested in science? Now how much sense does that make? And mind you these are people who are well versed on the topic of evolution? They were mad also saying discovery channel does present it properly. Then I would suggest that those who believe in evolution get on TV and explain it and show proof that evolution is taking place. Dont do like the discovery channel does and say "animals found ways to survive by evolving" or that it's "an evolutionary race" among animals. Millions of years is a long race dont you think? after all thats what it takes to change? according to them? Cause I wanted to see changes that happen faster to show that an animal can adapt by changing. Why cant they show a species changing over a hundred years, wouldnt it's young have at least some differences than it's great great grandfather? The only information most people listen to is things like the discovery channel which I think implies that change is a conscious effort made by species, which is ridiculous? They change because they need to? Oh c'mon. If that was the case then if you took animal out of it's environment, made a change such as make it's new home colder etc then in it's offspring (down the line of generations) we'd have to be able to detect some amount of change in the animal. One argument they had was if food was scarce on an island then animals would get closer to the shore and eventually adapt to the water? How long are they supposed to be feeling the shortage of food before changing? a million years? again it's ridiculous. Most believers on either side, whether you call them creationists or evolutionists are not well educated on the topic. Right now like it or not, life is a mystery. Theres no proof of anything to show all to have all agree. Thats why theres such a debate on it. We wouldnt argue with a first grader if he said 5 plus 4 is 10 would we? if we did then maybe we werent sure ourselves?

Answer 2

Evolution. Hands down. That is what the *vast* majority of scientists (as in over 98%) believe.

Why? Because the evidence for it is overwhelming. Genetic evidence, DNA evidence, fossil evidence, evidence from morphology (homologous and vestigial structures), the way bacteria and viruses change in response to medicines and vaccines (which is why we need new medicines and vaccines all the time), biogeography (e.g. evolution explains why kangaroos are in Australia, creationism does not), etc. etc.

When you say "there are legitimate facts to prove each one" ... what are the legitimate facts to prove creationism? You will hear people give arguments *against* evolution (all of which are pretty easily debunked), but I've never heard anyone give *ANY* arguments in *favor* of creationism other than a reference to Biblical passages (which does not count as "proof" in scientific circles).

In fact, there isn't really any such thing as the "theory of creationism". A theory in science is an explanation with evidence. Creationism is neither an explanation, nor does it have evidence. (When I say it is not an explanation ... an explanation is a description of something in terms of something simpler ... since a Creator is *by definition* more complex than his creations ... any appeal to creationism is the opposite of an explanation ... it replaces the thing that needs explanation, with something *more* complex and mysterious.)

BUT .. as for whether it is possible to believe in both .. YES!! All that is needed is to let go of a *literal* interpretation of the creation story in the Bible (a six-day creation, and the list of generations from Adam to Moses producing an age of the earth at 6,000 years old, which is *completely* anti-scientific). If you instead see the Bible as a metaphorical description of the beginning of time, the earth, humanity, and God's relationship to humans, then creationism and evolution are indeed compatible. Creationism defines the spiritual (and many would say the *important*) questions of our origins, and evolution is limited to only the biological questions.

Answer 3

I'd say the biggest reason is in our communication that has opened the door for further human evolution where as other primates lack this, and cannot evolve further in those directions. Somewhere along the line, we developed the ability to symbolize ideas, and use those symbols in place of objects. This opened a new door of group, an evolutionary growth you can see by looking at any history book. Without this, most animals are left with a very slow, physical evolution which they have very little control over. With the ability to control and manipulated ideas, we've been able to be most self selecting, and have been able to speed aspects of our evolutionary tracks (though not as much physically, but very much on a social and mental level). Thus we've excelled much further than anything else in this category because we first got that crucial initial trait of langustic symbolism. (this is different than langustic signals that animals use)

Answer 4

Actually there are only legitimate facts to support evolution, there are no ligitimate anything that support creationism,

heres how i worked it out, if we and all this was created then who created the creator, are we just agenetic experiment carried out by intergalactic scientists and if so who made tham.

evolution makes sense, the people who back the theory have nothing to gain, creationism on the other hand is supported by a bunch of avangilistical heretics that profit by convincing people that it is true, but there is no real evidence except their word to prove it, they are not unbiased and objective like a scientist is, because if sciene could prove creationism they would objectivley without bias.

i hope this helps, you may want to research how much money churches make each year also!

Answer 5

I kind of believe in both. There are facts for evolution that i believe in more than creationism because the facts are right there, but then again how did those first signs of life just get there? How was the earth made? I am still wondering that as well as you are. So I believe in both.

Answer 6

Evolution is a theory. It has everything science requires to be a theory, including a lot of evidence to support it in the form of the fossil record. Creationism has nothing to support it. Its a religious doctrine, not a scientific theory. Interestingly enough Charles Darwin set out on his voyage on the Beagle to prove the Biblical account of creation to be correct. His theory of evolution does not relate to creation at all--it is merely the development of species since creation, but some people insist on thinking that it is against God. It isn't against God. It is against the idea that everything has remained absolutely the same since God created it. And it has a lot of evidence to support it.

Answer 7

Creationism is not a scientific theory. It's a speculation and a religious dogma. There are no legitimate facts which support Creationism. There are no direct observations of the Creator(s).

There are three Republican candidates for President for whom I will not be voting, because of one or more of the following:
a) they weren't paying attention in biology class (do you want someone running the country who doesn't pay attention?)
b) they were paying attention in biology class, but prefer the faith of their fathers to actual facts and evidence. Do you want someone running the country who prefers to disregard science?
c) they were paying attention in biology class, but are lying about what they believe to pander to the stupid religious majority, to get more votes. Do you want someone running the country who's a big liar from the get-go?

Answer 8

To deny evolution is to exhibit great ignorance. To those who believe that a mixture of creationism and evolution occurred are also fooling themselves. There is no guiding hand to evolution only random mutation and negative selection.

If I hear one more idiot ask "if we came from apes why are they still here" I will lose all hope in humanity. We didn't COME FROM APES... APES and HUMANS share a common ancestor.. which is extinct!

These type of people probably believe that Jesus rode a dinosaur to church.

Answer 9

Yes both is the only way to go!
There are way to many things proving evolution to discount it.
BUT Evolution happening by pure chance doesn't work either.

I think God created man with a Built in mechanism to fix and or change what doesn't work or what no longer works

Answer 10

Consider this, when God was creating the world it took him seven days. A day for us is when the earth spins completely around on its axis. Since the earth didn't exist until God made it, who is to say that this is the measurement of a day too God? I believe that a day for God is millions of years during which he slowly created, and molded the first humans. This is my Creation-Evolution combo belief. Hope it made since, and was help full.