We can't really prove evolution or creationism. So why is evolution accepted as fact, and the other dismissed?

Evolution is a scientific theory that helps us understand the process of creation whether or not you believe in God. It is a way of looking at a thing, it is not presented as a fact as much as a coherent theory.

A good many Christian people have no problem with this wonderful theory. Whether or not in the end we discover we were created by an Alien Walt Disney for the amusement of really smart green sea turtles is

something else I don't think should be taught as fact either.

And it isn't a theory that helps me understand anything anyway.

Creationism is a religious belief and therefore can be believed or not, but to teach it in a public institution would be like trying to teach the proper use and mode and effects of baptism in health education, or researching the existence of God in science class, or Biblical Interpretation in English

class.

By the way we have evidence of intermediate species...but as it occurs ever so slowly over thousand of years, how could we witness it taking place?

I believe in God and would not try to "prove" God existence

in a science class either- but maybe in a Philosophy class.

That might be a proper place for a discussion Creationism, that or a political science class.

Oh, goody; 5 questions for the value of one. right here is going... a million. The scientific controversy has to do with the possibility of macro-evolution occurring. that's a mathematical impossibility. additionally, there is the innovations difficulty. existence isn't basically remember, it has innovations that organizes it. in case you place a frog in a blender, you will no longer do away with any of its remember, yet you will disorganize it. That motives it to die. 2. Evolutionists attempt to liken their "concept" to demonstratible ones like gravity and atoms. unquestionably it extremely is not a concept in any respect. Karl Popper, a famous twentieth century logician of technological know-how mentioned that evolution became into no longer a scientific concept, yet a METAPHYSICAL analyze application. in case you won't be ready to falsify a hypothesis, than that's unscientific. 3. back, evolution isn't a scientific concept, yet a naturalistic philosophy. That mentioned, any evidence that comes around is interpreted in accordance to the evolutionary paradigm. endure in ideas that there is a brilliant distinction between information and INTERPRETATIONS. 4. creation technological know-how and layout are no longer welcome interior the scientific community because of the fact they invoke the supernatural quicker or later. That contradicts the philosophy of naturalism. Evolution is of a similar opinion with naturalism, subsequently that's embraced by employing naturalists. 5. Origins isn't a scientific difficulty. there is not any way for technological know-how to respond to the place existence, the earth, and the celebs got here from. Origins is a scientific non-question. that's a question for philosophers and theologians. subsequently, evolutionism and creationism are the two non-scientific and should no longer study as technological know-how. The scientific evidence ought to help the two evolution or creation, yet no longer the two. If the evidence is accumulated wisely and suitable interpreted, than it is going to vindicate one and debunk the different. so a ways there is lots evidence that helps the assumption of a international-huge flood and a youthful earth. there is likewise a wealth of innovations that helps the assumption of a effectual and clever author. Evolution is a political difficulty. only like geocentricity became right into a brilliant deal in Galileo's time, evolution is a brilliant deal today. quickly, in spite of the incontrovertible fact that, the rotting corpse of evolution would be buried.

Because creatonism can be DISproven.

And evolution can be proven. It holds up to independent, secular, objective scientific study. Unfortunately very few people understand what a 'theory' really is.

For instance, gravity is a 'theory.'

People who believe in creationism do so despite all scientific evidence to the contrary. People who believe in evolution simply don't believe in a 100% literal interpretation of a collection of historical documents that were written, rewritten, modified and censored by thousands of imperfect human beings forced by some pretty heavy economic and political influences over the past 2,000 years.

I bet you will find very few creationists who observe the ritual sacrifice of goats and bulls; the uncleanliness and total subjugation of women; strict kosher laws; chopping off a man's hand because he stole a loaf of bread, or putting out the eye of someone who looked lustfully upon a woman; and so many other 'laws' set down in the OT.

How many creationists believe that multiple generations in biblical times lived for more than 700 years apiece, yet our earth is still just 6,000-odd years old?

It is very important to note that many leading theologians - including the Pope - have publicly stated that the theory of evolution and the belief that God created Earth are NOT mutually exclusive. They can (and do, for the majority of Christian people) coexist peacefully. There are really just a handful of religious sects who insist otherwise.

FYI, your statement that the finding of ancient bones is not a valid argument for evolution is incorrect. You might want to study a bit of anthropological science. :)

Evolution is not accepted as a fact. Evolution is a scientific theory, meaning it is not just a guess but it is a hypothesis that has undergone rigorous scientific analysis. Like all scientific hypotheses, however, evolution is open to further investigation and modification as new information comes forward. Creationism does not lend itself to scientific testing because it is based on belief and not on a testable hypothesis.

As an aside, there are many people who feel they can support both ideas -- acknowledging evolution as a scientific theory that explains changes in species over time as evidenced by fossil and bone data but with a religious belief that God is the supreme creator.

Yes we have observed the changing of one species into another. You creationist know nothings have not the " duke " of an idea what constitutes a species. Evolution, the change in allele frequency over time in a population, is a fact. You need to keep that in mind.

We have so much more evidence than you could possible intimate an understanding of, for evolution. Creationism has not a scintilla of evidence in support of it.

we have, in fact, observed these changes! and beside that, we have observed the effects of these changes and we have observed lesser changes. just becuase a species doesn't become a new species, doesn't mean that it isn't evolving. and you need to learn the difference between a "valid argument" and "proof:" the finding of ancient bones" IS a valid argument, but it is NOT proof. the bible and ancient stories are NOT valid arguments, nor are they proof, evolution has a lot more going for it and makes a lot more sense!

Actually, I have found around 100 journal articles where new species have been observed spontaneously forming, many times under highly controlled conditions. The creation of a new species often mucked up what were well planned and controlled experiments. It is now a trivial biology experiment to get species to form in controlled circumstances, without the use of genetic engineering in any way.

Likewise, many things claimed by Christians to be true, even some statements of Jesus are in fact, empirically false.

I suggest watching the PBS show on Intelligent Design and why the courts have ruled it is bogus. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/

Well with science it's not that you're actually proving that something is true, it's just that you've tested it a lot and failed to prove it wrong each time. That's what they've done with evolution. There's no evidence or proof that evolution didn't happen, and there's supporting evidence to believe that it did happen, such as the fossil record and also genetic analysis of living creatures.

With creationism, this is what would be considered "unfalsifiable" by the scientific community. It's impossible to prove wrong, because people will just say, "Well you can't see God.." So basically there is no way to scientifically test or disprove it so it's thrown out.

This is the scientific community though. Everyone is free to believe whatever they want regardless of proof or lack thereof.

We have observed changes in species ... mutations, and natural selection. We can compare the DNA of different species, and we find that the more similar the species appear and act (for examples, house cats and lynx), the more DNA they have in common.

We can alter the DNA of plants and animals to create new varieties (genetically modified vegetables, hybrids such as "dogats" and "ligers"). We can reproduce all the steps needed for evolution to take place.

The problem with natural evolution is that it takes such a long time. For a new species to evolve, a mutation has to occur which gives an animal an advantage over its competitors, plus is a dominant gene, plus doesn't make it so different that it can't breed with the original species. After several mutations like this, the new animals are different enough that they no longer breed with the original species, and a new species is formed.

But, as I said, beneficial mutations are *rare*. If we only get one every 5000 years, that's a long time in human terms, but only one-millionth the age of the Earth.

Evolution has been proven through observation. Also how can you be foolish and deny that fossils are not valid argument for evolution? Is it because you are incapable of understanding it?

Get the facts straight and try to learn something from science.

Sorry but creation has nothing to back up any of its claim other than the bible.