Poll: Evolution vs Creationism NO FLAMEWARS PLEASE

[lenin_117]

This is a thread in which to debate evolution and creationism and to suggest/debate any other ideas you may have. I personally am an evolutionist but not to a great degree. I think it's the best theory we have right now, but I think it will be replaced at some point in the future. I think creationism is wrong in that what it proposes does not concur with many scientific laws. Specifically an omnipotent god and how he weilds this power (i.e. how does he turn raw energy into water, mud, life, speech etc). What we need now is a creationist to respond to this and if you happen to be an evolutionist then you can answer as well but try to propose an argument against your current stance. Responding posts please quote what you're answering and at the start of every post just write creationist, evolutionist or other e.g.

Evolutionist
(Insert quote here)

Place response here

Oh, and most importantly avoid flame wars. Be over the top polite, even PC if you have to and if somebody responds by insulting or degrading your views then be the bigger man and take it with dignity, and respond as such. P.S. thanks to nilcypher for the amazing quick response, and don't troll. And this is mainly macroevolution. Opinions are fine but I would prefer they are labelled as such.

 

[Yankmy Armoff]

Evolutionist

the saddest part of this debate is that only one side can resort to actual proof. Thats why i cant accept creationism. I'd like to think someone was looking out for us but the evidence supports an absence of god.

 

[lenin_117]

Evolutionist

the saddest part of this debate is that only one side can resort to actual proof. Thats why i cant accept creationism. I'd like to think someone was looking out for us but the evidence supports an absence of god.

Ok that's borderline inciting a second coming or crusades. Anyway, nothing supports the absence of a god, there just isn't anything to support it. It also depends on what you call a god.

 

[Yankmy Armoff]

allow me to clarify by 'the evidence supports an absence of god' i probably should have said "there is no proof of gods existence YET"

sorry, trying to remain concise doesnt help me get my point across, will be more eloquent next time

 

[Fairee]

Oh, and most importantly avoid flame wars.

Flame wars on a Vs. topic are as inevitable as night following day.

As for the topic, I have no opinion. I believe in both.

 

[Abedeus]

Oh, and most importantly avoid flame wars.

Flame wars on a Vs. topic are as inevitable as night following day.

As for the topic, I have no opinion. I believe in both.

Yeah, it's kinda... pointless to say "no flame wars" in a VS thread. That's like hitting someone in the face and shouting "DON'T TASE ME BRO!"

 

[Cpt_Oblivious]

Evolutionist.

Creationism makes sense but it sends my bullshit detenctor off. Although I do love the explanations for dinosaur fossils etc.

When I can justify myself more I shall return.

Oh, and most importantly avoid flame wars.

Flame wars on a Vs. topic are as inevitable as night following day.

As for the topic, I have no opinion. I believe in both.

Maybe Day follows night and we're all wrong?

 

[lenin_117]

Oh, and most importantly avoid flame wars.

Flame wars on a Vs. topic are as inevitable as night following day.

As for the topic, I have no opinion. I believe in both.

You don't live above the arctic circle do you? Night need not follow day for months, and if this thread lasts that long I will be very satisfied. Any theists out there, don't be shy.

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

Evolutionist.

Creationism just doesn't make any sense.

edit: You probably aren't going to find anyone on this site who backs up creationism.

 

[Internet Kraken]

Oh come on, the result of this thread will be inevitable.

I guess I would say evolutionist but I prefer to avoid topics such as this.

Don't be afraid to dodge the sensitive issues.

 

[Avatar Roku]

I'm Evolutionist.

I just want to take this opportunity t preempt a creationist argument I always hear: that evolution is "just a theory." Just to clear that up, a scientific theory is not what we would call a theory (that's a hypothesis). It has to be vetted and confirmed a good deal before it can become a theory. And a theory never becomes a law. Here's an example:

Hypothesis of gravity: I think things fall.
Law of gravity: Things fall. Period.
Theory of gravity: Things fall because...

 

[bad rider]

Evolution, I'm an athiest I don't believe in god, ergo believing in creationism would be somewhat difficult and hippocritical.

 

[lenin_117]

Evolutionist.

Creationism just doesn't make any sense.

See, you're going to have to elaborate there. What about it doesn't make sense?

 

[Sindre1]

I Europe, noone belives in creationism.
You Americans are gullible ^^ Trying to pass off religion as science

 

[Hyper-space]

Oh come on, the result of this thread will be inevitable.

I guess I would say evolutionist but I prefer to avoid topics such as this.

Don't be afraid to dodge the sensitive issues.

congrats! you found the agility bobblehead

 

[fletch_talon]

I believe evolution is more than just a theory its common sense. We know mutation occurs in species' populations. Natural selection is just logic, if you're more capable of surviving than someone else, then you're more likely to survive... DUH!

So in regards to evolution, the only debate I see is whether the Earth has existed long enough for evolution to take place. Creationists constantly try to point out flaws in science's reasoning, but since everytime I see them attempt to do so its an epic phail on their side, I have trouble taking them seriously.

For example, some creationists or (intelligent design theorists) will claim that a complex adaptation of an animal can't have developed by evolution because it woud need to do so piece by piece, and that one piece on its own provides no benefit.
The flaw? A mutation doesn't need to be beneficial in order to survive, it helps certainly, and having a negative effect on the creature's survival rate will hinder its chances, but the fact is, the organism with that trait has as much chance of passing its genes on as the organisms without said trait.

 

[lenin_117]

I Europe, noone belives in creationism.
You Americans are gullible ^^ Trying to pass off religion as science

Just go away. You are both very very wrong (trying to tell me that religion does not exist in Europe!) you are also trolling. So bugger off.

 

[Jadak]

Creationism, except with aliens, not God (that would be silly )

 

[Internet Kraken]

I'm Evolutionist.

I just want to take this opportunity t preempt a creationist argument I always hear: that evolution is "just a theory." Just to clear that up, a scientific theory is not what we would call a theory (that's a hypothesis). It has to be vetted and confirmed a good deal before it can become a theory. And a theory never becomes a law. Here's an example:

Hypothesis of gravity: I think things fall.
Law of gravity: Things fall. Period.
Theory of gravity: Things fall because...

There was a whole section in my biology textbook about the definition of theory in science because of this argument.