creation versus evolution?

Ack! This is why I hate these "debates" in science classrooms. They completely confuse what science is all about!

Notice your use of the word "proof" or "prove" ... science is not about "proof" ... it is about *EVIDENCE*.

And phrases like "I believe that evolution is true and creation is not". Science is not about what we "believe" it is about what we *UNDERSTAND*. And science is not about what is "True" but what *works* ... does it help us *explain* something!

I should be really clear that I am not blaming you ... I am just pointing out how *HORRIBLE* these "debates" are when kids are debating things like evolution without first understanding the *BASICS* of what scientists do, and how scientists think! When kids do that, they solidify "beliefs", and grow up thinking they understand evolution enough to either accept it or reject it absolutely as "True" or "False", and never question that belief again.

This is sad. And it is why there is such a disconnect between scientists and non-scientists in this country ... not just about evolution, but about what words like 'theory' means, or the difference between "evidence" and "proof."

---- {end of soapbox} ----

OK. You asked a question, here's my answer.

First, religion and science are NOT in opposition. It is possible to believe in a Creator, and *ALSO* accept evolution as the explanation for HOW that Creator (God) made us.

How? In exactly the same way that it is possible to believe that God made you *personally*, but *ALSO* accept the biological process of human reproduction as the explanation for HOW that Creator (God) made you.

In other words, just logically ... there is no fundamental difference between accepting human reproduction, and accepting human evolution. Neither one denies God.

But if you are arguing with somebody who thinks that evolution MUST be seen as a rejection of God ... then the discussion is over. They are bound by religious duty to reject anything else that comes out of your mouth. You may think you are debating evidence ... but you're not. They have the wall up, and anything that even *begins* to make sense will just bring the wall up higher. Believe me. I've tried. Forget evidence. It is irrelevant.

As far as evidence of evolution ... again, I really HATE getting into discussions about *evidence* before first making sure that (A) nobody in the classroom thinks that all evidence of evolution MUST be false, period, because they think it contradicts God; and (B) everybody has a really good understanding about what evolution SAYS. If some kids in the classroom think that evolution is just about monkeys morphing one day into people ... then all the evidence in the world provided by people who really understand evolution will be absolutely *meaningless*.

But you asked for evidence, so here you go:

Please see my answer to this question:

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Am...

P.S. Happy Bicentennial Darwin Day! (I mean that.)

> "my classmates are having a debate over creation and evolution"

Please tell me this debate is not occurring in a science class.

> "one guy believes that evolution is a conspiracy"

Ask him what reason all the world's scientists would have for forming this conspiracy. The USA alone contains over 480,000 scientists, and 99.85% of them accept evolution as true. This is a *massive* number of people to be involved in such a conspiracy.

It can't be to obtain funding - because evolutionary biology is far from the best-funded field of science: maybe cancer biology is a conspiracy?

> "he believes that humans were created 10000 years ago by god. he gave a bunch of evidence for that but i don't think it makes sense....other people do"

There is NO evidence of a 10,000 year-old world which holds-up to scrutiny. As a trivial example: how has the light from stars farther away than 10,000 light-years reached us? (remembering that our galaxy alone is 100,000 light years across, and the nearest other galaxy - Andromeda - is 2.5 *million* light-years away)

> "another guy believes that natural selection occurs and evolution is an established fact"

This is trivially demonstrated to be true. You only need to go as far as the new 'flu virus each year, or the emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria to see evolution-in-action.

> "he also believes that the bible is written by man and that hell and heaven were made to use fear on the people that doesn't believe it."

Th Bible certainly was written by men - though it is, of course, possible that it was inspired by God.

The existence of God, Heaven, Hell, etc. cannot be verified or disproved by scientific or rational investigation.

> "u can try to prove to me that either evolution/natural selection is true, or u can prove to me that religion is true?"

Evolution can be seen all around you.

The theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is a scientific theory, and can therefore never be 100% proved. But it has held-up to all testing for over 150 years now. for examples of the supporting evidence see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_de...

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-research...

And, as I mentioned, it is not possible to prove that a religion is true or false.

> "how i can prove that creation is wrong?"

- the age of the earth, established by many different dating-methods, is shown to be 4.7 billion years. This contradicts and disproves a literal interpretation of the Genesis accound.

- the age of the universe likewise has been established by several methods, and is shown to be 13.5 Billion years.

- where did all the fossils come from? If they were laid-down in the Noachian Flood, then why are most of them of aquatic organisms? How is it that there are enough plant-deposits (in coal, peat, etc.) to cover the entire earth in forest several times over?

- if Noah bore animals on the ark, then why is it that marsupials are only found in Australia, and no placental mammals are? Also - what did the herbivores eat after being released from the ark - all the plants would have drowned, surely?

- for that matter, where did the water come from for the flood? And where did it go afterwards?

I could go on...

<<creation versus evolution?>>

The question is flawed. Accepting the evidence for evolutionary theory doesn't require rejecting some kind of creation. Evolutionary theory is unconcerned with the origins (if any) of the universe, the planet or even life. Rather, it accounts for the diversity of organisms on the planet.

<<u can try to prove to me that either evolution/natural selection is true, or u can prove to me that religion is true?>>

What you believe is your business, and none of my concern. If you don't want to accept the overwhelming weight of evidence that indicates evolution happens, then don't.

<<.can u tell me how i can prove that creation is wrong?>>

No. Religions are based upon faith, not evidence or proof.

<<can u give me some examples of the evidence?>>

Comparative anatomy, genetics, the fossil record, stratigraphy (the study of the sequence of rock layer deposit, and embryology all provide evidence demonstrating evolution has occurred. Furthermore, there's the evidence provided by evolution being seen to occur in laboratories around the world on a daily basis. Descent with modification is reality.

In general science can never prove anything, people put forward hypotheses based upon observation such as evolution and then collect evidence and perform experiments to test the hypothesis. A well designed experiment can disprove a hypothesis but never prove one. A hypothesis that passes many experimental tests and which is not superceded by a better hypothesis is gradually accepted as provisionally true, but not absolute truth. The faith involved in science is that in the value of scientific method in discerning truth, there is no objective way to prove it works just subjective experience as to the quality of life and understanidng of the universe it has brought.

Some hypotheses are not falsifiable, ie there isn't a way to disprove them so we can either accept them or not, such as god. In the cases of supernatural beings who aren't subject to the laws of the physical universe it can always be argued that they changed rules so the experiment is invalid, in the early 1800's some geologists argued that god had planted fossils during creation to confound our faith, science cannot disprove this. God could have designed a universe that appears to operate independently of him as a trick to test us.

As for the quasi-thermodynamic argument about systems going from more complex to less complex, this disingenuous, as long as the global(universal) entropic effect is correct the development of locally more organized systems is clearly possible and has been observed in many inorganic as well as biological systems.

I guess evolution, natural selection or science have stopped working for a while. Have not seen any changes as result of evolution in a long time. However, I see people building houses, Persons creating new technologies, etc. So it seems to me that there must be a need for a WHO to know and use the HOW for something to come to existence.

There is MUCH more evidence that natural selection happens than the existence of God.

There is no answer that will satisfy everyone. The population is much like the US congress: Everyone has their own ideas, everyone believes their own ideas are correct, no one can prove their ideas or disprove any one elses. So they waste time arguing because thats what they agree to do.

You've got a Juan Enriquez, Chairman and CEO of the research and inventment firm Biotechonomy that explains human self-design or "speciation" which is the evolutionary process by which new biological species arise.

Now, let me tell you what the Bible says, the first world was destroyed by the Flood of Noah because fallen angels came down and polluted the blood line (genome) of man. They went into the daughters of men and had children which were the giants of Mythology. The Bible also explains that God killed the animals because the fallen angels had even polluted the animal blood line by making half donkey half man Satyrs or Chimeras. They evidently made half eagle, half man Chimeras and polluted the animal species also. You see these monstrocities engraved on cave walls or of course mentioned in mythology. The giant one eyed cyclops, Ulysses, etc. The Book of Enoch says that these giant people ate all the provisions of men, their animals and started eating people.

This ABC News commentary by Lise Buyer titled "Happy Birthday Darwin; Hello Homo Evolutis" reminds me of what God said, "there is nothing new under the sun." Of course, God said this through Solomon the wisest man whoever lived because God made Solomon to be wise.

This is a sure sign that Christ will return shortly, because Jesus said it would be on earth like it was in the days of Noah. Great violence was in the world.

We already have the rat running around with a man's ear on its back.

The London Underground Mosquito that feeds on mice, rats and maintenance workers.

For man, God said that He created man in His image. We are created in the image of God and God will not take lightly man mixing up the genetics of man with animals. He destroyed the first world because of this.

Since God says that He is life, when man can produce life from nothing then I may take note. Until then, man is using evolution and creating monsters that man cannot control.

God knows that man cannot control himself. If God leaves man to do what is right in his own eyes, man self-destructs every time. God created man with an Instruction Book which is the best seller but seldom read. Even my toaster came with an Instruction Sheet.

If man would take God's Instruction Book the King James Bible and live his life accordingly, what a wonderful world we would have.

Adaptation has always been around, but finding that specie with the new information is not going to happen. God said kind produces after kind. When man messes with God's order, man gets out-of-order and chaos, war, trouble, discouragement, fighting, bickering, bombing and destruction happen quickly.

God set the laws of nature and the laws of man. Even the earth moans and groans awaiting the Lord so Christ can renew all things and get this out-of-order world into God's order.

This biotech entrepereneur mentioned above says that "Human Self-Design" may replace "Evolution." He even said that millions of years ago there were as many as five different species of humans co-existing on the planet. If you put enough millions and billions of years into the process because really no one knows what really happened back then, man can say anything.

It is so wonderful that God never changes, yet man changes his mind like he changes his underwear. God destroyed the first world because fallen angels and man messed with God's creation.

I heard a teacher say this once. "You go to church on Sunday to find out WHO created the world. You go to science class to find out HOW it was done." This makes a great deal of sense to me.

Both stances are religions. Evolution can not be proven nor disproven in science class. The people who believe that evolution is a fact just gloss over the facts that science in itself disproves it by how evolution started from simple and evolved to complex. All other science theories in other issues are just the opposite.

Religion can't be proven either.

But in reality they are both determined by faith. Evolution is disguised as science and fact but just a honest assessment will show there are gaps and inconsistencies.

And the Bible was written by man, but according to its authors was guided by God. So to discredit it only on this fact, shows dishonesty to being open to the possibility (which of course is sciences #1 rule - to be open to results that aren't expected).

So no one can prove or disprove anything. Both sides have facts that are undeniable. But also both sides have to have faith to believe them.