Evolution supporters against creationism?

Question

Why do so many people who believe in evolution claim that evolution is a proven fact for how the world came to be? I'll grant that there is evidence that suggests conclusions other than the biblical story, but there is no irrefutable formula, nor is there any experiment/study that PROVES this over creationism. Are they merely wishful thinkers like they accuse creationists of being or what?

Answer 1

I agree. Evolution seems to be the most logical theory at this time. But who knows what will be discoveredt tomorrow?

The Catholic Church does not take the stories of creation in the Bible literally. Catholics believe the book of Genesis tells religious truth and not necessarily historical fact.

One of the religious truths is that God created everything and declared all was good.

Catholics can believe in the theory of evolution. Or not. The Church does not require belief in evolution.

On August 12, 1950 Pope Pius XII said in his encyclical Humani generis:

The Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God.

Here is the complete encyclical: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html

The Church supports science in the discovery of God's creation. At this time, the theory of evolution is the most logical scientific explanation. However tomorrow someone may come up with a better idea.

As long as we believe that God started the whole thing, both the Bible and modern science can live in harmony.

With love in Christ.

Answer 2

There is no wishful thinking involved with evolution. The theories that it purports have been shown to be correct. Real science is about facts, not wishes, so that if there are ever new theories that explain how ife works and progresses better than evolution, science will investigate them and if worthwhile, embrace them and discard or revamp its understnding of evolution. Creation is purely wishful thinking, intent upon labeling any contradictory evidence as simply being in error. Direct from Answers In Genesis, on a page regarding tree ring dating, "However, when the interpretation of scientific data contradicts the true history of the world as revealed in the Bible, then it’s the interpretation of the data that is at fault." Excuse me?! Say what?! Stating before the conclusion that the Bible is true history of the world is a statement of faith, not science. This genuine quote from that website, which you may verify if you wish, directly contradicts the principles of scientific research to the point of rendering anything they say as completely invalid. Dismissing and discrediting evidence in favor of a predetermined desired conclusion can only be labeled as wishful thinking, as well as intellectually and morally dishonest. If Creationists want to delve into science, they need to leave the faith out of it and simply observe the evidence. If you can't take the heat, you should stay out of the kitchen. If Creationists can't take the science, they should stay out of the laboratory.

Thanks for the thumb, but quite frankly, what is there to thumb down in my comment except a slight tone of annoyed sarcasm and a bit of unpleasant truth? If a person does not understand what even constitutes valid science, what business do they have speaking so boldly on the subject?

Answer 3

In the world of science and matter,meaning everything perceived with the senses, the only basis for proving anything has to be directly or indirectly related to sensual perception. Much of religion is based on faith,inner feelings,things which cannot be perceived with the senses. There are many many bits and pieces of matter,like skeletal remains,in whatever form,which show a progression of life,although often quite incomplete, from lower,simpler,more basic forms to higher,more complicated forms. There is very little in this field of study where religion can show any actual material proof,certainly nothing which seems more possible than the accepted scientific material evidence. Christians simply believe,and that is fine for Christians. But scientists need proof. And the proof is in matter,things which can be perceived, rather than faith,hope and feelings, Everyone just has to decide for themselves. Our daily life is based on the world of matter. For many this is all that they want or need. There is no reason in free countries why we all can't have our own beliefs about this.

Answer 4

--EVOLUTION HAS proved itself to be a false science!
*** ce chap. 2 p. 17 par. 9 Disagreements About Evolution—Why? ***

And Britain’s New Scientist observed that “an increasing number of scientists, most particularly a growing number of evolutionists . . . argue that Darwinian evolutionary theory is no genuine scientific theory at all. . . . Many of the critics have the highest intellectual credentials.”7

*** ce chap. 2 p. 17 par. 10
--10 Regarding the question of how life originated, astronomer Robert Jastrow said: “To their chagrin [scientists] have no clear-cut answer, because chemists have never succeeded in reproducing nature’s experiments on the creation of life out of nonliving matter. Scientists do not know how that happened.” He added: “Scientists have no proof that life was not the result of an act of creation.”8

--CREATIONISM with its theory of 7-24 hour days for the earths 7 days of creation is also a false science since the Bible does not support that God excluded proven sciences! AND THE TIME factors involved in preparing the earth for habitation--
--THE DAYS OF creation can be rekoned to have been some 7,000 years for each creative day!
--WITH THE earths 4-5 billion years old--The Bible has no objection to this idea!

Answer 5

The problem is couched in the jargon. There are three actual religions in the world with each having sub groups. First there is deism. Deists believe in a creator God who made all things to exist. The Christian sub group believes in a Son of this God who they call The Christ savior etc.
Then there are the agnostics. They believe for the most part in intelligent design where design complexities suggest a designer for a biological system.
Next there are the atheists. They believe that the tenants of the evolutionary hypothesis explain the origin of all life.

As none of these hypothesis can be scientifically tested none of them can advance beyond hypothesis.
Evolution of species and perhaps even genus' is a fact (if you include insects). Species change occasionally due to intelligent human manipulation.
Belief that any of these hypothesis can be scientifically tested is faith (or perhaps lunacy) and is appropriate to discuss here not in the scientific arena. That many pseudo-scientists think that it can be considered science is absurd.

Answer 6

At times I wonder if those who hold evolution so tightly are aware that there is more than one evolutionary theory. And then the term evolution can be used evasively. Micro or Macro? And the term science is itself hard to define. When you provide them names of people who are doing experiments to show how evolution isn't occurring most of them don't bother to look. Because they feel they already have all the answers. There are the exceptional few who do bother and I thank them for that. Some claim that evolution has nothing to do with ow the world came into being which is incorrect because it is important in determining the time required for species to evolve. And conditions would need to be present in order for life to arise in the first place. It is some evolutionists who try and declare that life arose from random unguided forces. This trying to make the origin of life itself part of the theory. They even tried to have this put in science text books but do to the diligence of those watching they were caught on that point and made to remove it. For one it wasn't provable and secondly it is against the constitution for the state to be hostile towards religion. Claiming that evolution was random and unguided is considered hostile towards religion.

Answer 7

Evolution is a fact, in the sense that it has been observed that genetic differences occur in a population between generations. As an explanation for today's complex life, evolution is a very strong theory. It's a theory, in the scientific sense, because there is no contrary evidence. Creationism is not a theory in the scientific sense, because there is contrary evidence. Intelligent design isn't a theory in the scientific sense because it isn't falsifiable.

To refuse to believe in evolution just because "there is no irefutable formula" is to reject the scientific method itself. By your logic, there is absolutely no justification for your belief in any aspect of science, such as gravity.

Answer 8

anyone who is honest will admit that we are still looking for all the answers. However, there comes a point where one theory is so much more likely than all the others, and there is so much evidence that DOES support it, that it might as well be a fact.
Think of it this way. Eating fruits and vegetables is good for you, right? Everyone pretty much accepts that as fact. But what if you are allergic to say, beta carotene? Does that negate the premise that fruits and veggies are healthy? Of course not. For the vast majority of people, they are good things to eat. The overwhelming evidence is that fruits and veggies are good things to eat. So most people accept it as fact.

Answer 9

I have heard some sane people say that humans were brought to earth by aliens from out space. The missing link from ape to man is still missing. But, I do think that creationism is stretching facts when they say that humans and dinosauers lived together some ten thousand years ago when the earth was supposedly created..

Answer 10

1. Evolution is a complex concept. Many parts are fact, and many are theory.

2. It says nothing of how the world came to be - it deals only with speciation (and the implied common descent).

3. I can prove to you that The Bible is not literally true, if you really want to.