Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
__________________ We are surrounded by endless forms, most beautiful and most wonderful, and it is noaccident, but the direct consequence of evolution by non-random natural selection - the only game in town, the greatest show on Earth. ~R.D.
It isn't the theory of evolution, but the the theories of evolution. The distinction being that evolution itself is an accepted fact, and it's the ways and means by which evolution operates that the theories address.
As for the theory of creation, there is none. It's simply an asserted fact based on ancient writings.
It isn't the theory of evolution, but the the theories of evolution. The distinction being that evolution itself is an accepted fact, and it's the ways and means by which evolution operates that the theories address.
As for the theory of creation, there is none. It's simply an asserted fact based on ancient writings.
It seems to me that any actual theory needs to have some sort of data to go with it. Creationism has a data problem.
It isn't the theory of evolution, but the the theories of evolution. The distinction being that evolution itself is an accepted fact, and it's the ways and means by which evolution operates that the theories address.
As for the theory of creation, there is none. It's simply an asserted fact based on ancient writings.
Whatever it is (or they are), it (or they) has (or have)
In the layman's use of the word 'theory', (which could mean anything from wild speculation to hunch), yes. In the scientific use of the word 'theory', no.
No mass, no energy, no time, no space, that is a pretty good description for something that does not exist.
If you were to ask if God existed in a way in which we are familiar(naturally), I'd say He didn't. Hence the whole Supernatural part. The whole point of God is that He is not of anything we know, since He is the creator of all we know.
In the absence of proof, there's only the absence.
Join Date: 27th November 2008
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 1,217
Blessings: 29,334
Reps: 2,160,465,330,633 (power: 0)
Originally Posted by Darkness27
Hi everyone, I'm obviously new here, so I thought I would just take some time to say hi: Hi
We all know there is a theory of evolution, whether we all understand it or not, but if by some miracle evolution was proven false, does creation have its own theory to take evolution's place if the need arise?
It's claimants say yes, but creationism's reliance upon omnipotence and omniscience make it untestable and therefore unscientific since an omnipotent and omniscient entity could hide itself perfectly from us, thereby rendering the results of any test useless.
Further, it's my opinion that if we assume an intelligence can exist outside time then we can assume non-intelligence can exist outside time. Since intelligence existing outside time represents an extra assumption ontop of the idea of just existing outside time (in opposition to non-intelligence existing outside time), the idea of intelligence existing outside time fails Occam's razor in this comparison. Less complexity/fewer assumptions = more likely between two ideas, everything else being equal.
Linear Mode
