Two question's about evolution and such?

Question

1. Is 'Faith' a good or bad thing to have?

2. Which takes more faith to believe, Evolution or Creationism?

Answer 1

1.) faith is a euphemism for ignorance.
2.) if you *believe* in evolution, then you don't get it.

Answer 2

1. Faith is a good thing to have

2. Neither, Evolution isnt about faith its about science.

Creationism isnt about faith its about a bunch of fools or power mongers who made up a story to keep you under their control...

I don't see why if you believe in God that God couldnt have planned evolution.. The problem is the catholic church many years ago burned all the books of the bible except what is known as Pauline Christianity. They did this because reincarnation, evolution and other insights were a threat to their power structure.

Having faith in Creationism is like seeing God when your on an acid trip.

Answer 3

1) There is nothing wrong with faith. Unless you are talking about faith in evolution, then see response to #2...

2) It takes no faith to believe in evolution, because one doesn't believe in evolution. You either accept the evidence for it, or you don't. Belief plays no part in it. If you don't accept the evidence for evolution, that's fine...but if you think that there is a better scientific explanation of the number and type of organisms that live on Earth today, please bring some evidence forward that is better than what all young Earth creationists and intelligent design backers have tried to use in the past.

Answer 4

1) Faith is neutral. What happens if you have faith that you should kill certain people?

2) Evolution requires no faith since it is based on evidence. Creation requires active disbelief of the evidence.

Answer 5

1. Faith is good when it's all you have.
2. Creationism takes more faith because there is no way to actual prove it.

Answer 6

Faith is a good thing. Belief in Creation requires faith. Knowledge of biological evolution simply requires an honest look at the supporting scientific evidence, same as any other natural process.

Answer 7

1) No, faith isn't a good thing. 'Faith' just means believing in something that has no evidence. If there's no evidence, then why believe?

2) It takes more faith to believe in creationism, because evolution has evidence and creation does not.

Answer 8

1:faith in itself is good, it gives us hope. As long as you don't impose faith on others.

2:Well, creationism is based on faith, evolution is based on fact.

Answer 9

1. no

2. creationism. however, even if evolution was true, it wouldn't negate the possibility of there being a God. many atheists will tell you it does, but they don't realize that the passages in the Bible could be taken metaphorically just as easily as literally. remember, many of the passages were written in a time when allegories were a common form of communication. Jesus himself spoke in metaphors.

Answer 10

faith is used in normal contracting, ie...good faith loans and security deposits

I don't think faith has anything to do with belief... it takes gullibility to believe in things dreamed up by others

go with what you do know first, understand self first then worry about what cannot be known or proved

Answer 11

Imagine Mr. Mackey, the counselor, on South Park: "Bleeefs are baaaaddd... m'kay?"

'Faith' (magical, wishful thinking) is a lame and pathetic substitute for 'evidence'.

Faith-based 'belief' (the internalized certainty that you are privy to the 'truth' pertaining to vital aspects of existence and reality) is a lame and pathetic substitute for 'knowledge'... in fact, it is the ILLUSION of knowledge.

Faith + belief ---> Self-delusion and willful ignorance.

'Belief' is an insidious mind-killer... it cuts one off from the open-minded and intellectually honest (willing to actively question and doubt one's own assumptions) consideration of alternative possibilities.

*************

"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion." ~ Robert M. Pirsig

"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance... it is the illusion of knowledge." ~ Daniel Boorstin

Science does not 'prove' things. 'Proof' is for mathematicians, coin collectors and distillers of alcoholic beverages. Proof in science is applicable only in the 'negative' sense... i.e., hypotheses and theories must be 'falsifiable'. When scientists do experiments (to validate 'predicted' results), they are NOT trying to 'prove' they are RIGHT... they are trying to FIND OUT if they're WRONG. NOT being wrong simply builds confidence that one is on the right track... it 'proves' nothing.

Evolution is not a matter of 'belief'. I keep reading in here that "... evolution is just a theory... not a fact." That, as it turns out, is true... although the word 'just' is inappropriate, and misleading... and it indicates that people just don't understand what a scientific theory is; they seem to think that a theory is just an 'idea'. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In science, a theory occupies a higher stratum of importance than mere 'facts'. Theories EXPLAIN facts. The theory of evolution provides an explanatory framework for the OBSERVED FACTS that the genetic makeup of populations of organisms changes, over time (in some cases, over distance)... and that over an extended period of time (hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of generations), the accumulation of those changes can result in speciation. It explains the OBSERVED FACT of transitional species found in the fossil record.

Theories live or die on the basis of their explanatory power, predictive power and falsifiability. Theories, as an explanatory framework, allow one to make predictions which can subsequently be validated by way of experiments or future observations. That means that in order to be valid, a theory must be falsifiable... and all that it takes for a theory to be falsified is ONE INSTANCE where an experiment or future observation achieves a result that is CONTRARY to what the theory predicts.

Evolution, as it turns out, has NEVER been falsified... in nearly 150 years. Further, all findings and observations to date... in molecular biology... in genetics... in paleontology... have SOLIDIFIED the explanatory power of evolution... NEVER detracted from it.

For those that say that evolution does not account for new species... nonsense. Examples abound, both in the 'world' and in the laboratory. One of the most interesting examples, and the most enlightening, has to do with a kind of bird (plovers, if my memory is correct) that occupies adjacent habitats all the way from Siberia to Britain. Because of environmental differences in these adjacent habitats (topology, food availability, competitor species, predators, vegetation), natural selection has produced genetic differences between the populations in these adjacent habitats. Birds in adjacent habitats can still mate with each other, and produce offspring... the genetic differences are small. However, the birds from the Eastern-most reaches of Siberia CAN NOT produce offspring with those from Britain. Over the reach of MANY habitats, the accumulation of genetic differences makes them a DIFFERENT SPECIES.

Perhaps the following will clear things up for you.

There are a few important things to know about biological 'evolution'...

* DNA DOES NOT evolve... it experiences mutations.

* Organisms DO NOT evolve.

Organisms are essentially the 'proxies' for altered DNA, playing out the 'game' of survival/procreation in 'meat space'. DNA whose proxy organisms manage to procreate get to move on to the next round... kind of like Jeopardy. This is where 'natural selection' plays out. 'Survival of the fittest' is a complete misapplication of the concept... it implies (and is usually interpreted to mean) faster, stronger, smarter, etc... able to take, rather than share. Granted... in some cases it MIGHT mean that. But MORE often, it means something like better camouflage... slightly better tolerance for arid conditions... a new protein that permits the use of a food source that was previously toxic to the organism... etc. THAT is 'natural selection'... ANYTHING that increases the STATISTICAL PROBABILITY that an organism will survive long enough to procreate... and that is ALL that it means.

* It is the genetic makeup of POPULATIONS of organisms (the 'gene pool') that 'evolves' (changes, over time).
.