Darwinism or Creationism?
I'm Darwinism.
Answers:
This choice is an oversimplification. “Darwinism is not a simple theory that is either true or false but is rather a highly complex research program that is being continuously modified and improved.” Darwinism is not only well defined but parts of it are irrefutable – to say you don’t believe in it probably means that you don’t understand it very well (and it seems most Americans have a very poor understanding).
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/darwinis.
Creationism comes in many flavors, not all of which see the world being created by God – in some creationist stories, the universe may be created by God but the world is created by the Devil or some other demiurge. Even the Christian creation is divided into many camps (it seems most Americans have a very poor understanding of this as well). Creationism is so poorly defined that its meaning to different people is worlds apart. The only two things that creation stories have in common is that they are completely outside the realm of science, and they demand a belief in supernatural forces.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/demiurge.
So when you ask “Darwinism or Creationism?” you’re really asking “Scientific Method or Supernatural?”
This is a question that has been asked over and over again, but personally I believe in a kind of combination. Providence to get things started, darwinism to keep it going.
Definitely Darwinism
Both for me. I cant imagine the world without having either.
Darwinism without any shadow of a doubt
both
I believe in evolutionary biology and believe Darwin's work is a large and major contributor to that theory, but my belief is much broader than Darwinism covers. Many, many, many people, experiments, and observations have contributed to the theory of evolution, which is why it is such a well supported theory, not just Darwin's work.
Creationism is mythology.
Darwinism is science.
Once you understand this, it's easy to see how they can both co-exist.
Did it ever occur to you that it coudl be both? If GOD exists, it doens't mean thta Darwin was wrong..
God created Darwin, God created the creatures he discovered in order to test those of the faithful. It's both, you just need to see it..
Creationism i am sorry ape
Definitely, creationism-I feel sorry for you that you believe in fairy tales for adults, sometimes called 'eviloution'.
Pythagorean theorem or Jack and the Beanstalk?
Darwinism. because religion refuses to evolve.
Darwin all the way
we have about 99% proof of this theory
I can understand why people used to believe in creationism. but with scientific and geological knowledge now.. how can people not believe in Darwinism?
Check out the late Bill Hicks - "Revelaton".
Definitely Darwinism. Most creationists will argue that the complexity of the Earth is proof of the existence of a god. However, they seem to forget one thing- they are assuming that god is sentient, therefore if god made the earth who made god? If you follow this back far enough, something must have come from nothing..
Have you ever read Rupert Sheldrakes ideas on this? Take a look at the book 'presence of the past'. It is rather interesting. I don't go along with creationism but I don't altogether go with Darwinism. too much is unexplained. However, the whole point of a scientific theory is that it is tenable until the facts prove otherwise, or a theory that better fits the facts is propounded.
Obviously I will not get the ten points here 'cause I disagree with most of the above answers. It is Creationism for me, simply because the world was around long before the man Darwin was created in the womb of his mother by the Creator Himself. Certainly Creationism, however, whem the Bible speaks of seven days, that does not necessarily mean seven 24hour days, it could very well mean 7 years. How? Well the Bible says 'there was evening and morning, a first day' - If you venture to either of the polar regions, there is six months of darkness (fall/winter) and six months of continuous light ( spring /summer) which makes one year, but also an evening and a day
Darwinism/evolution.
Darwinism. It's too beautiful not to be true.
What is creationism anyway? Surely it means something different to each person that thinks it sounds like a good idea.
Darwinism of course. It may not have been proved conclusively but any gaps that exist are surely due to lack of surviving knowledge and evidence. Humans have lived on this planet for such a minute amount of time that it has been in existence that a lot of the "missing links" will have been destroyed. If a photo album misses out a year of someone's life it does not mean nothing happened then, just that there is no visual proof. Things have changed,that person has moved on, evolved if you like into the person in the next photo. Hope you like the analogy!
As for fairytales, surely the best has got to be the big bearded man in the sky making a planet just for fun and inhabiting it with lovely fluffy animals and humans intent on destroying it!
LOL at Bob's answer!
I would like to forward my theological opinion that Genesis is an ancient description of evolution and therefore, people that argue for creationism or intelligent design are simply not careful readers of scripture.
I base my opinion on the first two chapters of Genesis.
The creation story says God created animals and then human beings. But the story of the garden says God created Adam and then the animals to be Adam's companions. God created Eve when no animal was found to be an acceptable companion for Adam.
It is apparent to me from these texts that Adam was created before human beings but then progressed (in some mysterious manner - I say evolution from a single cell being) to be the first man.
For those who argue that Adam was created fully as a human male (including penis), I have to ask, what was Gods intent for Adams genitalia while He created the animals to be Adam's companions?
Anyway, Darwin's contribution to science is natural selection, not evolution which was around long before him. And, although natural selection theory has some holes, it doesn't have to explain all evolution to be a valid explanation of how many genetic decisions are made.
Also, who's the wisenheimer that says natural selection isn't part of God's plan?
Something along the lines of darwinism. although i like the idea of a creator powering it and inventing it in the first place.
As someone with a Biology degree, I have to answer Creationism. The genetics and biochemistry of a human being are way too complicated for Darwinism to exist.
Creationism is fine as long as you approach it as faith-based. It's only once it is used as a science does it become dishonest. It is not science.
As a product of science, Darwinism does not pretend to know everything, or to be the ultimate answer. It is always up for question or even being discarded if the evidence demands it. Creationism, on the other hand, claims to have the answer, end of discussion. Yet it can produce no proof other than "if we discount everything else, it must have been this supernatural being for which we can offer no evidence".
That might satisfy some people, but I'll take Darwinism. It may not be perfect, but at least it starts out in reality.
Neo-Lamarckianism.
Neither - panspermia is the answer!
Will you sign my petition to get ridof wind? (the weather kind)?
in daigrams of our solar system all 8/9 planets are shown in the same plain is this so?
Al Gore has said our environment is dieing. What can we do to change this?
Booking land on the moon?
Can you solve this puzzle question giving explanation's as you go. Carmel borrow's a car from Khaled. He say's
why is the earth round and is the cor of the earth made of magma?
.long division?
Apollo Landings?
Answers:
This choice is an oversimplification. “Darwinism is not a simple theory that is either true or false but is rather a highly complex research program that is being continuously modified and improved.” Darwinism is not only well defined but parts of it are irrefutable – to say you don’t believe in it probably means that you don’t understand it very well (and it seems most Americans have a very poor understanding).
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/darwinis.
Creationism comes in many flavors, not all of which see the world being created by God – in some creationist stories, the universe may be created by God but the world is created by the Devil or some other demiurge. Even the Christian creation is divided into many camps (it seems most Americans have a very poor understanding of this as well). Creationism is so poorly defined that its meaning to different people is worlds apart. The only two things that creation stories have in common is that they are completely outside the realm of science, and they demand a belief in supernatural forces.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/demiurge.
So when you ask “Darwinism or Creationism?” you’re really asking “Scientific Method or Supernatural?”
This is a question that has been asked over and over again, but personally I believe in a kind of combination. Providence to get things started, darwinism to keep it going.
Definitely Darwinism
Both for me. I cant imagine the world without having either.
Darwinism without any shadow of a doubt
both
I believe in evolutionary biology and believe Darwin's work is a large and major contributor to that theory, but my belief is much broader than Darwinism covers. Many, many, many people, experiments, and observations have contributed to the theory of evolution, which is why it is such a well supported theory, not just Darwin's work.
Creationism is mythology.
Darwinism is science.
Once you understand this, it's easy to see how they can both co-exist.
Did it ever occur to you that it coudl be both? If GOD exists, it doens't mean thta Darwin was wrong..
God created Darwin, God created the creatures he discovered in order to test those of the faithful. It's both, you just need to see it..
Creationism i am sorry ape
Definitely, creationism-I feel sorry for you that you believe in fairy tales for adults, sometimes called 'eviloution'.
Pythagorean theorem or Jack and the Beanstalk?
Darwinism. because religion refuses to evolve.
Darwin all the way
we have about 99% proof of this theory
I can understand why people used to believe in creationism. but with scientific and geological knowledge now.. how can people not believe in Darwinism?
Check out the late Bill Hicks - "Revelaton".
Definitely Darwinism. Most creationists will argue that the complexity of the Earth is proof of the existence of a god. However, they seem to forget one thing- they are assuming that god is sentient, therefore if god made the earth who made god? If you follow this back far enough, something must have come from nothing..
Have you ever read Rupert Sheldrakes ideas on this? Take a look at the book 'presence of the past'. It is rather interesting. I don't go along with creationism but I don't altogether go with Darwinism. too much is unexplained. However, the whole point of a scientific theory is that it is tenable until the facts prove otherwise, or a theory that better fits the facts is propounded.
Obviously I will not get the ten points here 'cause I disagree with most of the above answers. It is Creationism for me, simply because the world was around long before the man Darwin was created in the womb of his mother by the Creator Himself. Certainly Creationism, however, whem the Bible speaks of seven days, that does not necessarily mean seven 24hour days, it could very well mean 7 years. How? Well the Bible says 'there was evening and morning, a first day' - If you venture to either of the polar regions, there is six months of darkness (fall/winter) and six months of continuous light ( spring /summer) which makes one year, but also an evening and a day
Darwinism/evolution.
Darwinism. It's too beautiful not to be true.
What is creationism anyway? Surely it means something different to each person that thinks it sounds like a good idea.
Darwinism of course. It may not have been proved conclusively but any gaps that exist are surely due to lack of surviving knowledge and evidence. Humans have lived on this planet for such a minute amount of time that it has been in existence that a lot of the "missing links" will have been destroyed. If a photo album misses out a year of someone's life it does not mean nothing happened then, just that there is no visual proof. Things have changed,that person has moved on, evolved if you like into the person in the next photo. Hope you like the analogy!
As for fairytales, surely the best has got to be the big bearded man in the sky making a planet just for fun and inhabiting it with lovely fluffy animals and humans intent on destroying it!
LOL at Bob's answer!
I would like to forward my theological opinion that Genesis is an ancient description of evolution and therefore, people that argue for creationism or intelligent design are simply not careful readers of scripture.
I base my opinion on the first two chapters of Genesis.
The creation story says God created animals and then human beings. But the story of the garden says God created Adam and then the animals to be Adam's companions. God created Eve when no animal was found to be an acceptable companion for Adam.
It is apparent to me from these texts that Adam was created before human beings but then progressed (in some mysterious manner - I say evolution from a single cell being) to be the first man.
For those who argue that Adam was created fully as a human male (including penis), I have to ask, what was Gods intent for Adams genitalia while He created the animals to be Adam's companions?
Anyway, Darwin's contribution to science is natural selection, not evolution which was around long before him. And, although natural selection theory has some holes, it doesn't have to explain all evolution to be a valid explanation of how many genetic decisions are made.
Also, who's the wisenheimer that says natural selection isn't part of God's plan?
Something along the lines of darwinism. although i like the idea of a creator powering it and inventing it in the first place.
As someone with a Biology degree, I have to answer Creationism. The genetics and biochemistry of a human being are way too complicated for Darwinism to exist.
Creationism is fine as long as you approach it as faith-based. It's only once it is used as a science does it become dishonest. It is not science.
As a product of science, Darwinism does not pretend to know everything, or to be the ultimate answer. It is always up for question or even being discarded if the evidence demands it. Creationism, on the other hand, claims to have the answer, end of discussion. Yet it can produce no proof other than "if we discount everything else, it must have been this supernatural being for which we can offer no evidence".
That might satisfy some people, but I'll take Darwinism. It may not be perfect, but at least it starts out in reality.
Neo-Lamarckianism.
Neither - panspermia is the answer!
The answers post by the user, for information only, UKQnA.com does not guarantee the right.