Posted by Dealer on July 20, 1998 at 04:15:51:
In Reply to: Theory posted by DNA on April 26, 1998 at 17:35:57:
These arguments are astoundingly Evolution-Sided. It would be nice if people can look at both sides and see each for the strong points, instead of discarding one because it disagrees with the Bible, or the other because it disagrees with a narrow minded belief that because a theory deals with God, it can't be considered science. Was science considered science before Darwin? Practically everyone was creationists then.
: : I really believe that for the most part, we can agree on evolution. I agree with you that it is a damn good theory. It certainly has much more to offer than creationism. My only beef is your statement "Evolution is just a theory is laughable"
: : I put evolution lower on my list of scientific truths, below say Newton’s laws, Laws of Thermodynamics, Theory of relativity. Still, in the context of all truth, it’s pretty high on the list.
: : Maybe we still disagree. Whatever the case, I enjoy this site. Keep up the good work.
: : --Alan
: I'm not certain that you understand how the word "theory" is used in science.
: Let me give you my take, and see if you agree or disagree.
: We observe some facts. Fact number one: there is a great diversity of life on this planet.
: Fact number two: Evolution (descent with modification) has been observed.
: Theory: Evolution accounts for this diversity of life.
Try this. Fact number one: there is a great diversity of life on this planet.
Fact number two: Evolution (descent with modification) has been observed.
Fact number three: Evolution (change from one species to another) has never been observed in life, in history, nor in fossil evidence.
Theory: A knowledgable creator created in his creations a way to change within it's species.
This theory fits the facts just as well as Evolution. If you were building something, wouldn't you want it to be able to adapt? Just because it deals with a creator doesn't mean that it is completely religious and must therefore be thrown out immediatly. The study of early human artifacts and tools deals with the same topic. We can't prove that they were created, we can deduce that it's more probable that they were created by intelligent life than that they were just an accident of nature.
: Now, evolution is a theory *not* because it isn't proven, because it *can't* be proven. It takes too much time. It is a theory because it is a framework for explaining observed facts.
: Since there is absolutely no other explanation that fits the facts as well as evolution, it is accepted as the explanation for the diversity of life on the planet.
: Creationism isn't a theory. There are no observed facts which support this idea. It is a religious ideology, no science.
I agree with you that evolution can't ever be proven to be a fact. But no observed facts in creationism? It's just a religious ideology, no science? Is engineering a science? Yes, it is creating order out of nonsence using scientific theories and knowledge. You can look at the objects and tell that they were probably created. Look at an airplane, it's made of aluminum, metal, fuel, etc. Evolution is equivalent to saying that a tornado (natural process) going through a junkyard (raw materials) could create a working 747 (useful matter). Theoretically it's possible, just like evolution, but realistically, it just doesn't fit the evidence shown in this case.
Don't get me wrong, however, evolution has a few strong points over creationism, it's just that you have to keep your mind open if you are looking for knowledge. If religion doesn't fit the facts, throw it out. If it does fit the facts, it may deserve consideration. Something that 'fooled' people for thousands of years deserves a chance at least.
See the origin of the word science-the search for knowledge, not (as now seems to be the case) a search for naturalistic knowledge.
[ Follow Ups ] [ Exmormon.org- Honest Inquiry Message Board ] [ FAQ ]