Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 1/12/06 11:44 AM, Dranigus wrote: Evolution is a religious belief holded by athiests and some religious people.

It isn't a religious belief in that it involves worship, it is a religion it that its followers hold to a specific set of beliefs and a way of thinking. Here's the definition of religion that applies the best to evolutionism: A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion. Evolutionism, I think, is closer to a cult than a religion, but I guess it's all in how you look at it.

There isn't enough proof to support it and there are many ways in which it can be disproved. Like with advancements in technology for instance.

I agree, as we gain more scientific knowledge, I believe the more evolution will be discredited. Even some evolutionists admit that the theory of evolution isn't perfect and that we may one day come up with a new, better theory for the origin of life. Evolution has to be adjusted all the time to acomidate new scientific evidence, the Bible hasn't had to change once to acomidate all the new scientific evidence, though perticular creationistic theories have had to change.

Creationism = Religious Ideal
Evolution = Scientific theory

Where is the debate here? Both are just different points of views, that have there place. Yes both should be taught in schools, but not in the same courses. Offer a religion course so that Creationism can be taught there, and an scientific course so that evolution can be taught there.

It seems that the major problem is that people feel that creationism isn't being given a fare chance. But it's not a scientific theory, and really doesn't belong in a science course.

Evolution seems to be under attack for trying to debunk religion, when all that's trying to do is provide some way of seeing how so many differences in biology can appear from what we would think was nothing. And besides, evolution got it's inspiration from religion. Adam and Eve. Don't you think it's interesting how so much can come from only two sets of genes?

Personally, I'm far more convinced by evolution, but I do see why some believe in creationism. It's what they are taught, and what they see around them.

At 1/12/06 03:30 PM, Applin wrote: Creationism = Religious Ideal
Evolution = Scientific theory

Where is the debate here? Both are just different points of views, that have there place. Yes both should be taught in schools, but not in the same courses. Offer a religion course so that Creationism can be taught there, and an scientific course so that evolution can be taught there.

It seems that the major problem is that people feel that creationism isn't being given a fare chance. But it's not a scientific theory, and really doesn't belong in a science course.

Evolution seems to be under attack for trying to debunk religion, when all that's trying to do is provide some way of seeing how so many differences in biology can appear from what we would think was nothing. And besides, evolution got it's inspiration from religion. Adam and Eve. Don't you think it's interesting how so much can come from only two sets of genes?

Personally, I'm far more convinced by evolution, but I do see why some believe in creationism. It's what they are taught, and what they see around them.

Agrees. Creationism should be discussed and taught, but in religon and philosophy classes.

After all, if biblical creationism is taught as though it were true, why not other religon and cultural beleifs on the creation of stuff.

re·li·gion

1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

As you can see evolution does not fit in any of these definitions. Before you say number four, no one devotes themselves to evolution in the way that this definition implies. So evolution is not a religion. Anyone who says otherwise is an idiot or a creationist trying to pass off evolution as religion because they failed to pass of their "faith" as science.

i am a christian

I do not want creation via god to be taught in school, it can be taught at church. I am questioning the validity of evolution. First off by definition science must explain everything in terms of naturalistic laws. Darwin’s theory of evolution contradicts the cell theory. The cell theory clearly states that all living things must come from a previously existing organism. The question I’m asking is where did the first organism come from. For something to be alive it must be able to store information, be able to act on this information, and be able to tap into energy. This brings me to the chicken and the egg paradox. Each of these previously mentioned tasks require the others to function. So an organism would have to spontaneously evolve with all of these things from nothing. Also since there is no organism for this first organism to come from and due to the fact that nothing non living on this earth divides (like DNA, which is necessary for evolution) this first cell must have just randomly come to be which is preposterous. I think evolution should be withdrawn as a theory and be called what it is, a hypothesis.

I say that the teachers teach both theories. Both could be true or one of them can be true. In other words, it is the school's damn decision. They talk about Evolution, then say what they think about Creationism. I believe either it is Creationism, or both(God created evolution, then created Adam and Eve).

Majority rules in a democracy, so why don't allow the populace to decide whether they wan't ID taught in schools?

Hooray for bumping a year-old thread when there's a current topic on the very front page!

We r smrt monkeys in hurr.

Oh what the HELL!? Don't I have enough of these fucking threads to worry about??

Fucking assholes bumping out of date threads ALREADY featured on the front page.....

Lemme guess, the lil bastard's a 15 year old......

At 2/12/07 10:48 PM, JakeHero wrote: Majority rules in a democracy, so why don't allow the populace to decide whether they wan't ID taught in schools?

It's already been done. Congress is elected by the people to decide what the people want. The people as a whole don't want Intelligent Design taught in schools. Mainly because it makes no scientific sense.

It's quite funny how all the evolutionary discoveries were done by religious people.

At 2/13/07 01:09 PM, sex-crazed-maniac wrote: It's quite funny how all the evolutionary discoveries were done by religious people.

Darwin

At 2/13/07 02:48 PM, Peter-II wrote:

At 2/13/07 01:09 PM, sex-crazed-maniac wrote: It's quite funny how all the evolutionary discoveries were done by religious people.

Darwin

Smashing.

At 2/13/07 01:34 AM, Bolo wrote: It's already been done. Congress is elected by the people to decide what the people want. The people as a whole don't want Intelligent Design taught in schools. Mainly because it makes no scientific sense.

Actually, it was done by some asshole judge. I guarantee if you had a vote on it the American people would want an evolutionary/ID hybrid instead of this strictly atheist viewpoint on the matter of abiogenesis.