I accept evolution because of the immense weight of evidence supporting it. It is as robust and strong a scientific theory as any. No proffered alternative thus far has anywhere near the evidence that evolution does.
I also question the Biblical literacy of any Young Earth Creationist claiming to support the account of creation in the Book of Genesis. Genesis 1:1-2:3 and Genesis 2:4-25 relate two very different accounts of creation, which contradict each other on the timeline of events. So why do they proclaim the creation account of Genesis 1 but gloss over the contradictory tale in Genesis 2?
I also question the Biblical literacy of any Young Earth Creationist claiming to support the account of creation in the Book of Genesis. Genesis 1:1-2:3 and Genesis 2:4-25 relate two very different accounts of creation, which contradict each other on the timeline of events. So why do they proclaim the creation account of Genesis 1 but gloss over the contradictory tale in Genesis 2?
No one seriously claims evolution was a theory to explain the origin of life (and if there is, they're wrong). It's a theory to explain the origin of species.theemporer said:If you cannot give me evidence proving an explanation for how life sprung out of nowhere to begin the evolution process, you cannot call evolution "fact". Telling everyone that a theory is fact is asking for FAITH. Thus, science that calls itself "fact" is no better than any faith-based religion, perhaps worse for it's claims to be above it.