Which is more probable: Creation or Evolution?

Answer 1

Both of them .
I think, creation to hydrogen molecule.
After that evolution started.

Answer 2

Many individuals that dont know anything about biology will disagree with me because they dont know the facts:

The more probable is creation if you are talking about speciation (the occurance of a new species). Evolution does occur over time within a species (there is evidence for this) but has not been empirically shown to have created a new species from an existing one. The probability of that occuring is infinately small, scientists have done the math.

So, although evolution is not only probable but has and is occuring, the theoretical part of evolution which proposes that new species can be formed through evolution is less probable than the idea that a divine creator was involved.

I have a master's in molecular and cell biology, you really need to study this topic in depth to understand why this is so.

Answer 3

Creation is a story that was written down by some peasants in the desert thousands of years ago. It is contradictory and highly inconsistent with what we know about the world.

Evolution is the explanation that has been worked out by thousands of scientists and scholars who have looked critically at millions of different observations of biology, paleontology, geology and other disciplines and worked out an explanation that is consistent with all the facts that we know about the world. We use the idea of Evolution constantly in studying new information in biology and medicine, and it is a very successful and effective model.

So, if you expect to have a future career in biology, it would be a good idea to try to understand what the biologists have discovered about life on earth.

Answer 4

Clearly evolution is the more probable.

To believe in Creation, you need to be able to dismiss all the scientific evidence for the last 200 years and longer. You can just accept that everything was created as it was meant to be, and be content.

For evolution, you may have to change the way you look at the world. You need to accept that humans are animals, biologically speaking, and that apes are our closest living relatives. You should be able to look at two different animals, such as whale and hippopotamus, and see how they could have had a common ancestor.

So your choices are : simple and wrong, or complex, interesting and correct.

Answer 5

The answer depends on your definition of the words evolution and creation.

If by creation you mean everything being created as we see it now, then I'd say that's virutally ruled out as a viable theory, no matter what religious fundamentalists would like you to believe.

If by evolution you mean the appearance of life from a lifeless world, that seems possible but is as yet not proven scientifically.

However, if by creation you mean simply that a divine entity created the world and by evolution you mean changes in organisms in response to natural selection, the later is pretty much conclusively demonstrated, and the former cannot be ruled out by any form of scientific investigation.

So, was the world created in its current state? Not a chance.

Was the world created by a divine entity in some primordial state and allowed to evolve into its current state? Possibly.

Was the world simply the result of natural processes with no creation by a divine entity? Possibly.

Which is more likely? No way to answer that scientifically.

Answer 6

Evolution is more probable. It is the theoretical process by which all species develop from earlier forms of life.
According to this theory, natural variation in the genetic material of a population favors reproduction by some individuals more than others, so that over the generations all members of the population come to possess the favorable traits

Answer 7

Depends who you ask, the scientist (especially biologists) would say evolution. The fundamentalist muslim or christian would say creation. If you want to study biology you will certainly have to adopt evolution, since the whole science is based upon the theory of evolution. If you adopt creationism there is no point at all in studying biology, since you won't agree with anything, and you won't be able to study anything because everything you study will challenge you creationism-beliefs.

Answer 8

For a good definitive answer to this question I suggest you read Prof Richard Dawkins book The God Delusion. In it he points out the absurdity of believing in a creator and gives very valid reasons for evolution.

Answer 9

What is more likely:

a) Very simple protobionts self-assembling from micelles and interesting organic macromolecules in the "primordial soup" that we suspect was available on early Earth, or

b) A superintelligent, superpowerful omniscient omnipotent entity forming spontaneously from Chaos and Void?

==
Ginny G, the answerer above me, is incorrect. There are several observed instances of speciation, and plenty of cases where speciation is the BEST explanation for the biodiversity observed. I doubt she has a master's degree in any science.

Answer 10

Creation is about believing without any evidence.

Evolution is about thinking, studying facts and evidence.

Please, please, if you truly do want to be a biologist, recognize that you must go with thinking and evidence, not believing religious propaganda.