Could anyone please give me a creationist argument dissproving evolution. Perhaps it is just me being ignorant but I can’t come up with any logical way, or rational way for that matter, of disproving it.
Evolution is quite a grounded theory I’ll say. I can only hope ID will serve up something a bit more concrete. They definitly need a new approach to validating the “supernatural”, and instead concentrate on resolving between what science doesn’t know and what science can’t know.
It could be that God has this whole creation thing captured on video disc. In which case God picks a specific timeline and creation begins at the moment he slips the disc into the player. The evolutionary aspect, however, would still span the full length of the video.
Since the Creation of this physical realm revolves around a metaphysical being you would not be able to prove that he/it created such. However if you look deep enough into the theory of evolution you may find that Humans and Neandrathol are 2 different species. If this is so then you are still missing your answer for where "Humans came from.
If you were to debunk evolution saying that an alien race from mars seeded the earth during the time of mars’e breakdown from an inhabitable touninhabitable planet to to a metior striking it or some other incident caused by the race itself or a natural event. Then this would mean that we did Not evolve but were created by such or rather they used their genetic code to “create” us a sub species or lower evolved form of themselve’s.
(Theory from Mission to Mars)
If you could prove this theory or that humans “Were” in fact created from the dust by a superior being,(Not that dificult if you had a technology that could rearange mass, energy and matter into a form of your chooseing.
Also Physics state the human body is empty sapce if it evovled would it not contain and be describable by the very laws that govern this physical realm?
The creationist argument is based on faith alone.
Intelligent design is a supposedly logical argument based on our lack of knowledge of certain evolutionary processes. Where we don’t know the exact process, we see God in the “gap”. The problem is that basing an argument on “lack of knowledge” is not scientifically valid. Future research may fill those gaps.
All true creationism is still based on faith alone, as it should be.
I concure.
So, is there such a thing as reasoned faith?
fman wrote
Why must it be one or the other? God cannot create anything greater than himself or God would not be God. So creation is actually decreation or the involutionary movement from complete unity (God) into the diversity we accept as Creation. the process or mechanical interactions of universal law is “God’s Will.”
At a particular level of decreation the unique need for organic life on our planet produced the essential building blocks of the life force within materiality that would mature or evolve into the myriad forms or diversity corresponding with universal laws and reflecting the higher reality of organic life as a whole. Evolution, or diversity into unity, is the normal response to the universal flow of involution, unity into diversity.
Evolution and involution are manifestations of God’s Will. Their complimentary flows sustian the mechnics of our universe.
Nope. Faith is putting your complete will and belief behind something unforseen or something you can’t see physically. There is no reason behind believing in God because nothing has been proven to us that he exists. That is to say, there is no physical proof that one all mighty powerful being created us.
My personal understanding of religion versus evolution is that the too ideas must coordiante to solve eachothers tribulations. One of the three key point to evolution is that every living thing has a father. How then was there a start to life? Could there be an infinite circle, or is there a beggining. I beleive in the notion of genesuis. Genesuis explains the missing link in evolution. It makes sense to say that G-D is the father of original life. G-d on the other hand is not subkect to change, time or evolution therefor does not need a parent. Such a concept can not be understood through a logic which exists in a dimension formed in time. However, the idea of genesuis still explains the missing link in evolution
Except for the existence of the universe.
(“Universe” being a key word here.)
Do you have faith that the sun will shine tomorrow?
yes i have faith in the earth’s rotation…
An interesting point is the debate between creationists and natural evolutionists. What makes a magic assignment of the creation by a god more or less miraculous or incredible then a sequence of causes and effects that lead to the same result ? They can both be seen as totally miraculous and incredible or normal everyday phenomena. The reason why a magic assignment by a god seems so incredible is simply because we are not used to seeing it everyday. It is something too rare for our mind, it is something we are not used to experiencing or that is too far outside the way our mind decodes reality. But then for the creationists, the fact that matter can evolve automatically into a human seems just as incredible, it is something they are not used to experiencing etc.
So both explanations at a deeper level are equivalent, only that the creationist finds self evolving matter too impossible to be true and the scientist finds magic assignments too impossible to be true. It is more a debate on aesthetics, more on how things look, are they pretty or ugly, incredible or boring, etc. If we lived at the quantum size level, particles would pop in and out of existence every moment, we could easily accept magic assignments, or if we lived in a computer simulation where very complex things just appeared and dissapeared without cause and effect, we would easily embrace creationism. What is incredible and what isn’t ?
If we were living in The Matrix, we could entertain the possibility of both. Yes, the miracle exists in the fact that there is anything here at all. Not only that, that the whole thing seems to be so arranged that it can be experienced. This is just as incredible, if not more so.
This “Argument” is very well into details , please continue…
I have other things that I can say about this, but I am not sure this is the point where to begin, primarily because I’ve rarely had the opportunity to extend it beyond this point. I will say that my argument is based upon the existence of a Creator, however. What does it suggest to you?