I propose a compromise to creation vs evolution, stated using the (heavily paraphrased) words of the founder of the idea of Evolution, Charles Darwin, which he wrote at the end of "On the Origin of Species." "What a wonder it is that God had the foresight to create creatures capable of adapting to their ever changing surroundings" Again, very heavily paraphrased, but the gist of the matter is that God couldn't just create a world and hope it worked out, he would have had to create it in a way so that everything could work and survive according to the scientific laws
Why bring in god at all?
Do you, when studying computer programming, follow the scientific view but feel the need to remind people that god made physics that enable making computers?
Or when you study history, mention that god probably appeared to the people in their dreams telling them what to do?
It's definitely possible to believe in god and accept evolution, but god is such an unscientific poorly defined concept it should be left out of scientifc discussion.
Also, all kudos to Darwin, but who cares what he thought? Biology has gone forward during the 150 years.
Personally I get flabbergasted when I see this.
See - the thing is, I usually complain about how overly politically correct we always are, but this worry's me quite a bit. See - the fact a future scientist isn't allowed to believe in a theory (which it is - YES I KNOW IT HAS A TON OF PROOF BUT really it's the entire principle the matters!) is kind of why there are so many annoying things, because just a few people cannot be asked to take an opinion.
I mean hell - a LOT of people have a mixed between evolution and creationism - myself included and you may find this for a lot of the people here *cough second comment*, i.e - the fact evolution makes sense - of course! - but sometimes it leaves holes and there's still a hell of a lot of other things to consider.
Considering that intelligent design or creationism aren't scientifc theories, yeah, thinking that they are kinda means they don't know either what a scientific theory is, or what those ideologies are about...
It's possible to believe in some vague type of creationism, though, that cannot be disproven because it's so vague, but that's hardly scientific.
And even if we'd, for the sake of an argument, say that evolution is untrue and doesn't happen THAT WOULDN'T MEAN CREATIONISM IS TRUE.
And the way creationists try to justify their ideas without ever doing research or formulating any actual theories is what annoys me so much about them.
Although, I should mention that when we are talking about'creationism', we can mean pretty much anything, some of the ideas of which would fit with evolution, some not. Because it's not a scientific field and has no real widely accepted definitions.
But it also leads to this situation where people who want the kind of BS that is unprovably untrue being taught in schools will paint the issue in such a light that people who don't really believe the world is 6000 years old will end up supporting them because they believe in some kind of creator and think that they are supporting such an idea against evolution.
I feel like slapping you for making such a retarded post (Kidding). But seriously there only really is one definition for it. Micro and macro evolution are just arbitrary distinctions made by laypeople.
Actually, we should BOTH be slapped, because nobody cited any sources.
I'm going to now. Macro and Micro evolution are distinct terms. They are not arbitrary.
I study biology in a university, and in my experience biologists don't really differentiate between the two, because there's not any real way to objectively do so.
When they are used, it's more along the lines of dividing animals to 'big' and 'small'. It's the same process, and they are considered to be the same thing. Ypu can say that at certain point something is certainly 'macroevolution' and at one point 'microevolution', but there's no clear point where one changes to another.
Speciation is discussed and studied, and if you're interested in the 'difference' between macro and micro, I'd suggest reading up on that.