A solution to the creationism v. evolution debate

[godinshorts]

i figure that if we were created by some "divine being" then he screwed up big time. Example: the human body, you can look in any anatomy book and see how messed up it is.

I think that if we were created then "god" was a no good slacker who was just concerned with getting us up and running as quickly as possible, Example: you need more than seven days to build something as big as a universe and do a decent job.

if you choose to reply to this please email me [email protected]

 

[OuroborosChoked]

Atheists are different from agnostics. You may notice I used the former. Nor did I say anything about the origin of 'life' I said the origin of man. Again, very different subjects.

I am aware of the difference. One can be both, though. Remember the etymological root of atheism = "a" (without) + "theos" (god). For followup reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist

There are many kinds of atheism. Unless you are only talking about "strong" atheism (ironically named), you CAN be an agnostic atheist.

And you are correct. I misread. But you actually said mankind, not man. Again, two different things. "-kind" being something you add to a word when you wish to address a variety of similar types, e.g. "apekind" - those that are ape-like. Therefore, "mankind" can be taken as somewhat vague; either meaning Man specifically, or man-like beings (neandertals, etc.).

 

[The Wooster]

There are many kinds of atheism. Unless you are only talking about "strong" atheism (ironically named), you CAN be an agnostic atheist.

And you are correct. I misread. But you actually said mankind, not man. Again, two different things. "-kind" being something you add to a word when you wish to address a variety of similar types, e.g. "apekind" - those that are ape-like. Therefore, "mankind" can be taken as somewhat vague; either meaning Man specifically, or man-like beings (neandertals, etc.).

The dictionary disagrees with you on that point.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
man·kind /ˈmænˈkaɪnd for 1; ˈmænˌkaɪnd for 2/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[man-kahynd for 1; man-kahynd for 2] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
?noun
1. the human race; human beings collectively without reference to sex; humankind.
2. men, as distinguished from women.

 

[OuroborosChoked]

i figure that if we were created by some "divine being" then he screwed up big time. Example: the human body, you can look in any anatomy book and see how messed up it is.

I think that if we were created then "god" was a no good slacker who was just concerned with getting us up and running as quickly as possible, Example: you need more than seven days to build something as big as a universe and do a decent job.

if you choose to reply to this please email me [email protected]

This kind of thinking always bothered me and it kinda goes with the idea of "higher forms" of life. Who defines perfection? Would an automaton nukuler neo-human android (ANNA) be the perfect human?

The human body isn't perfect, but it works for us, eh?

I'm not going to e-mail this to you, though.

 

[OuroborosChoked]

There are many kinds of atheism. Unless you are only talking about "strong" atheism (ironically named), you CAN be an agnostic atheist.

And you are correct. I misread. But you actually said mankind, not man. Again, two different things. "-kind" being something you add to a word when you wish to address a variety of similar types, e.g. "apekind" - those that are ape-like. Therefore, "mankind" can be taken as somewhat vague; either meaning Man specifically, or man-like beings (neandertals, etc.).

The dictionary disagrees with you on that point.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
man·kind /ˈmænˈkaɪnd for 1; ˈmænˌkaɪnd for 2/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[man-kahynd for 1; man-kahynd for 2] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
?noun
1. the human race; human beings collectively without reference to sex; humankind.
2. men, as distinguished from women.

I know what the dictionary says. The dictonaries are simplifiers of words and they don't give the full bouquet of what words mean and where they come from.

I can link, too: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-kind

See?

 

[The Wooster]

Assuming we ignore the definition of the term then mankind would still refer to classes of man. Man being, again by definition, a direct reference to homo-sapiens.

But this is a pointless argument and has nothing to do with the original topic. I'm dropping it.

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

Beleive whatever you beleive. May be cliche but it makes sense right? Im not particularly religious but the big bang seems improbable to me. Matter just exploding? Where do emotions or feelings come from that?

Emotions and feelings are survival machanisms, cultivated by natural selection. You'll find that an animal with fear, anger and bonding abilities will probably survive longer.

Also intelligent design's logic is fundamentally flawed, they argue evolution is too complicated to occur randomly, and that an infinitely powerful creator directs everything. If evolution is too complicated, how in the universe did an infinitely powerful being come into existence? As for the big bang, solid mathematical data exists to support it, and for the how could it just happen arguement; if during the end of one universe and that universe collapses, then it will become a singulairity again, which in all likelyhood will explode again.
The answer is one or the other not both.
But the truth is religion is almost like an evolved trait. People with faith do have an advantage in situations, it helps them keep their heads where panic could lead to disaster: Think About That

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

I think that if we were created then "god" was a no good slacker who was just concerned with getting us up and running as quickly as possible, Example: you need more than seven days to build something as big as a universe and do a decent job.

Just like Microsoft

 

[godinshorts]

no i dont expect the human body to be perfect, i just expect that if a god made us that he/she/it/whatever would do a decent job

 

[The Wooster]

no i dont expect the human body to be perfect, i just expect that if a god made us that he/she/it/whatever would do a decent job

Do you study biology?

 

[Monkfish Acc.]

I believe that god shouldn't be the answer to how, but the answer to why.

I don't know if anyone has said this yet, but I'm too lazy to read through.

 

[ianuam]

OP sounds like s/he's heading toward a god of the gaps theory (and i'm not using the word in the scientific sense). Slowly getting squeezed into insignificance. What's the point in believing in god any more? There's no evidence, despite what fundamentalists may claim.

 

[Redlac]

And there lies the problem of theist and atheist alike. God can't be proved or disproved by science. Science can only measure and see what is in this universe of ours. God is separate to the universe. Which doesn't help an awful lot.

 

[Alex_P]

And there lies the problem of theist and atheist alike. God can't be proved or disproved by science. Science can only measure and see what is in this universe of ours. God is separate to the universe. Which doesn't help an awful lot.

Not the kind of God that does anything. And I mean anything -- writing holy books, sending his son to die for your sins, designing biological systems, appearing in visions, &c., &c. That kind of God is, by definition, an active force within our universe.

The kind of God that isn't... well, he's absolutely indistinguishable from a void, isn't he?

-- Alex

 

[John Stalvern]

Simple. Evolution and creationism deal with two distinct subjects.

 

[TheIr0nMike]

Better idea, why don't we teach what's been proven by science in science class. I don't mind people believing in religion, but don't indoctrinate people into it. I don't go into churches and say that their isn't a god and they should all give up hope (I've thought of it, just for lulz, but I have respect for other people's beliefs and know what belongs where).

 

[Samirat]

As far as I'm concerned, atheists are essentially the same thing as those who are religious. Both believe in something, with no proof. In fact, I think there is more evidence towards the existence of God then to the opposite. For instance, what created the universe? The Big Bang is not a theory about the creation of the universe. Even before the Big Bang, there was something, some tiny point of matter, from which the universe sprang. So, what created that?

 

[godinshorts]

i do study biology, as a matter of fact im about a quarter of the way through grade 12 biology, thats what made me realize how messed up the human body is.

 

[Graustein]

As far as I'm concerned, atheists are essentially the same thing as those who are religious. Both believe in something, with no proof. In fact, I think there is more evidence towards the existence of God then to the opposite. For instance, what created the universe? The Big Bang is not a theory about the creation of the universe. Even before the Big Bang, there was something, some tiny point of matter, from which the universe sprang. So, what created that?

Except that atheism is the absence of belief in God, no more, no less. It's not belief in the nonexistance of God, although there are more than a few atheists who hold that view.

The Big Bang is a theory about how the universe as we know it began. As to where the Big Bang came from, we're still looking. The fact that we don't know where the Big Bang came from is not evidence that it was done by God.

 

[Joeshie]

As to the original post that was made, there is no debate between creationism and evolution. Evolution is based on observation and large quantities of evidence while creationism is not. At it's current form, creationism is basically a religiously fueled idea in order to try to push a religious agenda upon society.

As far as I'm concerned, atheists are essentially the same thing as those who are religious.

Atheism can be defined as either the lack of a belief in a God (weak atheism) or a belief in the lack of a God (strong atheism). Weak atheists don't actually have any sort of beliefs either way. This group is often paired up with agnostics.

For instance, what created the universe? The Big Bang is not a theory about the creation of the universe. Even before the Big Bang, there was something, some tiny point of matter, from which the universe sprang. So, what created that?

The problem you are making is that you are assuming that there needs to be a creator. Who says that there needs to be a creator? The problem with the Big Bang is that it's really difficult to theorize what happened "before" it. The current idea is that time (the fourth dimension) was created at the Big Bang. Since there is theoretically no time until the Big Bang, how can something be before it? The concepts of "before" and "after" lose all meaning when time isn't present. The very nature of the universe "prior" to the Big Bang may be completely outside the realm of human comprehension.