Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
      4. Frontier Pursuits
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. DLC
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. Help & Support
      7. The Diamond Casino Heist
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA 6

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA IV Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA SA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA VC Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA III Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Sign in to follow this  
Charidemus

Creation vs Evolution

Recommended Posts

Canofceleri

I'm with evolution.

 

But... God isn't dead, you have to first be living in order to die. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheRoper

creationism is ridiculous... everytime science proves it wrong, those who believe it just ignore the facts...

 

where is god? why would he create this planet and then kick back and watch 300,000 people die in a tsunami, or let thousands of innocent children die of malnutrition every day? that's like me building up an ant farm and then pouring a cup of water on them, or starving them to death... it's just cruel...

 

if there is a god, he's not very nice... more importantly, there's not a single fact proving his existence (and i'm talking more than jesus' face appearing in a slice of toast... "the king returns!... in a slice of toast!..." dozingoff.gif)

 

user posted image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jheath

 

With Creationism, everybody already knew how the Earth and life was formed.

...

 

Now with evolution, that process is reversed. The scientists started by looking at the evidence.

 

Thank you Craig... I think so far your post has been the most intelligent one on this topic. However, I feel I should add something to the distinction you make between the way scientists and Creationists work (and yes, I reject any overlap between those two groups):

 

Scientists don't necessarily start with the evidence. Many theories start out as logical exercises, speculations which the scientist then tests to see if it syncs with reality. (Witness, for example, the way Einstein's theory of relativity came into being.) Scientists can have just as much an ax to grind when formulating a theory as other people... what marks them as scientists is they they have to accept the verdict of evidence at the end of the day.

 

A scientific hypothesis, by Popper's definition, is testable, and more importantly, refutable. Conversely, if you cannot conduct a test which could refute your hypothesis, it is NOT scientific. A hypothesis may be correct, but it is outside the domain of science until it is testable.

 

A big problem with Creationism is that it evades making testable hypotheses. For example, speculating that the Earth is 6000 years old *should* be testable, based on an enormous range of evidence, ranging from radiological dating, genetic analysis, astronomical observations, etc etc. The problem is that Creationists know the overwhelming bulk of evidence contradicts their claim, so instead they make further speculations that the radiologic and other evidence must be wrong. So, to back up an untenable hypothesis, they make an even wilder hypothesis, justified only by the assumption that the first hypothesis must be correct. Of course, it *is* possible that the radiologic, genetic, geologic, and astronomical evidence is wrong... but you'd need a great deal of testable data to back up such a momentus assertion, and instead the Creationists tell us to suspend judgement and just believe.

 

Nowadays, pure Creationism has been replaced by a watered-down version of the same faire called Intelligent Design. Some posters in this thread allude to it when they say "ok, so evolution is probably correct, but it must have been the tool God used to create the species." Unfortunately, this theory makes no specific, clear assertions which can be tested, so it too falls outside the realm of science.

 

However, I should point out that the theory of evolution doesn't tell us "what" happened (that's what the fossil trail is for), but rather indicates the mechanism for "how" it could have happened. That "how" is the probability of genetic mutation, and the consequences that arise from it. So saying that God "directed" evolution is a contraction... either it was the laws of probability causing the mutations, or God. (If God created the laws of probability, that's fine by me, but that still means evolution would have been undirected.) Fortunately, we can test the laws of probability as they relate to mutations... the results of those tests form the genetic basis for understanding evolution.

 

Anyway, my post is getting a bit long. I hope this adds something to the debate by clearing up what makes science scientific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fox09

Wow, this is a good topic. I can't believe that I haven't been to this part of the Forum yet!

 

 

 

I'm really not sure of myself, religious wise. I am really leaning toward Evolution, but the uncertancy of death is the only thing that keeps me from becoming a complete athiest. If there really is an all knowing super being, that created this planet, I don't want him/her/it to send my humble spirit into "Hell." Spending an eternity of endless pain isn't really my cup of tea.

 

 

I have done some thinking, and if The Universe was created by a small, incredibly dense, ball of matter, that happend to explode, sending chunks flying into the outer reaches of space, that doesn't necessarily mean that that ball of matter was the only one in existence/that ever existed.

 

Also, for all we know, that huge mass of matter could have been inhabited. Of course, if, like someone said, it was super-heated, than that erases all doubt. But, it could not have been. That mini-planet, could have had highly intelligent life forms. And, when it exploded, it, obviously, killed off every living thing on that planet. Thus, every species had to start all over again.

 

 

Ok, now I'm starting to rant. But, just-so-ya-know, I have almost nothing to back those theories up. I'm just pulling random thoughts out of my ass.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ilikensrs
Wow, this is a good topic. I can't believe that I haven't been to this part of the Forum yet!

 

 

 

I'm really not sure of myself, religious wise. I am really leaning toward Evolution, but the uncertancy of death is the only thing that keeps me from becoming a complete athiest. If there really is an all knowing super being, that created this planet, I don't want him/her/it to send my humble spirit into "Hell." Spending an eternity of endless pain isn't really my cup of tea.

 

 

I have done some thinking, and if The Universe was created by a small, incredibly dense, ball of matter, that happend to explode, sending chunks flying into the outer reaches of space, that doesn't necessarily mean that that ball of matter was the only one in existence/that ever existed.

 

Also, for all we know, that huge mass of matter could have been inhabited. Of course, if, like someone said, it was super-heated, than that erases all doubt. But, it could not have been. That mini-planet, could have had highly intelligent life forms. And, when it exploded, it, obviously, killed off every living thing on that planet. Thus, every species had to start all over again.

 

 

Ok, now I'm starting to rant. But, just-so-ya-know, I have almost nothing to back those theories up. I'm just pulling random thoughts out of my ass.

 

 

There is no reason you can't reconcile religion with science. Understand that the bible isn't meant to be taken word for word as the only way the earth was created, and you can still have faith in a creator of some description. As my old man told me when I was but a wee lad, you can take christianity literally, or you can take it seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BenMillard

 

There is no reason you can't reconcile religion with science. Understand that the bible isn't meant to be taken word for word as the only way the earth was created, and you can still have faith in a creator of some description. As my old man told me when I was but a wee lad, you can take christianity literally, or you can take it seriously.
Jheath supplied several reasons why religion is incompatible with science. Since religion is based upon faith, it rejects all scientific evidence and logical study. Indeed, one must reject the scientific evidence and logical study in order to retain the gods. This puts religion it completely at odds with science, which is non-fiction (aka. fact). If it is the case that Creationism is not to be taken literally, then it cannot be used to make any specific analysis of the phenomena it attempts to describe.

 

As such, Creationism is of little use when compared to the accuracy already shown by Evolution. Evolution is a systematic and detailed account of the physical processes involved with creation, rather than the romantic and inapplicable fairytale offered by Creationism.

Edited by Cerbera

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The-King

Someone said earlier, that discovering life doesn't make you a god creating it does (or something like that), so basically you are saying that if a woman gets pregnant, and has a baby that she is a god because she created life?

 

Some of you should read the book by John brown, Angels, and Demons, it points out allot of little known facts, like that a monk actually created the big bang theory, and many other interesting facts, and is a good read to.

 

One thing I don't get is how religious people base every thing they believe, on faith, and not scientific fact, or logical thought. Some big dude up in the sky created the whole world, with just a couple snaps of a finger, yeah right. I mean how many petitions have churches made to bring stupid new laws, like the gay marriage ban, or sh*t like that, they even try to close down scientific facilities, because they are false, or something like that, when I heard the gay marriage ban passed I thought what a bunch of inconsiderate mother f*ckers, thinking that they rule the world. It just infuriates me. ¢$¢

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BenMillard

Actually, the origins of the Big Bang theory can be traced back to ancient Greek philosophers whose concept of the "atom" (smallest invdivisible unit of the universe) led them to suggest that all the universe may have started as a single "atom" entity. The actual theory proper is best credited to the researchers who accidentally discovered the background microwave radiation still present from the creation event. Because of that I'll probably skip reading that book. wink.gif

 

The result of this seems to be that Evolution is an accurate method for explaining the development of life while Creationism is inaccurate at a scale which makes it inapplicable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.