and (why) do you think these two theories are really incompatible?
http://www.articleated.com/Article/Caution--Is-It-Really-a--Theory--/600
2007-07-26 10:51:57 · 35 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The only side with supported evidence... evolution. Intelligent design just says "we don't know, there must be a god" all the while ignoring the mountains of evidence for evolution. Most religious people write off evolution because it doesn't mesh with their ideas, instead of logically following observable information. This would be akin to everyone being guilty until proven innocent (this person is guilty so prove he is not).
2007-07-26 10:54:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
You don't have to be on a side. Evolution happened and is scientific fact supported by huge amounts of evidence.
The theories are incompatible simply because Science is the study of natural explanations of occurences. And any god would be a supernatural being.
2007-07-26 11:05:11 · answer #2 · answered by meissen97 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Evolution. I'm of the belief that deity is the natural universe. Evolution is a natural process. Therefore it is "of deity". But I don't necessarily know if I could concede with a "creation" that was "intelligent design" (i.e. deity did it on purpose - with intent to create) because I think it's a natural process and I really don't know if there was intelligence behind it or not. So I believe it's possible. I just don't want to be arrogant to assume I really know for sure. So I'll stick with what I know to be true - Evolution is fact. The rest is subjective. If that makes sense...
2007-07-26 11:00:32 · answer #3 · answered by swordarkeereon 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As a biology teacher I am with evolution, as a Christian I am with creationism. I live a dual and hypocritical life:-) I do not feel that the two are incompatible. I give God enough credit that he could have caused evolution. I can't ignore the evidence I have spent years studying. Nor can I reject God. As an SDA evolution shakes the very foundation of our beliefs, but not my personal belief. We had an entire quarterly study on how science should be rejected, I couldn't attend b/c the stupidity was appalling and my husband feared I would be disfellowshipped for speaking my mind! As a teacher when I teach the evolution unit I get death threats and hate mail. The JW students bring me books and Baptist pastors send me letters saying the church prayed for me last week. I had one student say her mother spoke in tongues about me at their church, but no one could interpret (I thought you weren't supposed to speak in tongues unless someone could interpret?!?). I acknowledge all with a polite thank you and live my life (I keep the hate mail and letters in a scrap book, I am hoping for at least 100 by the time I retire). I get SICK of the debate that rages over this. Most people that are against evolution have NO IDEA WHAT IT IS ABOUT!
2007-07-26 11:05:16 · answer #4 · answered by biology.teacher 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
My belief is they are compatible because it all had to start somewhere so there is the creation.
Take note of a few things.
The orbit of our solar system around a larger solar system.
The orbit of earth around the sun.
The orbit of the moon around the earth.
I believe it is safe to say these things have remained the same throughout time.
The idea is that there is more to the subject than just animal and human bodies changing over time.
Some things have never changed. Such as the "orbiting" example I gave.
Beyond that, an important question comes up. Why would living beings rise from raw materials and evolve into complex creatures and yet the raw materials themselves have stayed the same throughout time?
In other words, what can we say about a living mix of chemicals that evolves yet an inanimate collection of the same proportions of the same chemicals is not affected by the same environment to the point of evolving?
It seems to me the rules of evolution would apply to not only living creatures but also to the chemicals which are represented as the source of all living creatures.
These inconsistencies in my opinion serve to prove the hand of God.
2007-07-26 11:39:41 · answer #5 · answered by Lorenzo H 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I like how the person who wrote that article talked about the misuse of the word "theory" and goes and misuses it himself.
Regardless of if you want to believe that evolution does/is/continues to happen, its there.
If you could just look through the blindfold of your religion you might learn a thing or two.
2007-07-26 10:57:19 · answer #6 · answered by kaltharion 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Only one is a theory. Evolution is a scientific theory that has so much confirming evidence behind it that the bulk of it is simply irrefutable now.
Creation is not a theory. It is an ancient mythology. It does not even qualify as a hypothesis, because it is untestable.
2007-07-26 10:56:49 · answer #7 · answered by Diminati 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
There not incompatible. It is possible that some type of supreme being set the universe on an evolutionary path.
2007-07-26 11:07:35 · answer #8 · answered by akschafer1 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The article is weak.
Evolution has never been at opposition with the existence of divinity. There are many forms of Creationism. While "Scientific" Creationism is incompatible with reality, there are other doctrines that, although scientifically untestable, are compatible wiyh science.
2007-07-26 10:58:25 · answer #9 · answered by novangelis 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Evolution is a hypothesis that has never been proved.
Evolution claims, random change & natural selection make simple things spontaneously transform into more complex things without recourse to intelligent design. Chance and random changes simply do not produce higher levels of organization & complexity.
2007-07-26 15:04:19 · answer #10 · answered by Steve 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋