Posted by Ilene on September 6, 2005, at 23:46:34
In reply to Re: Evolutionary Theory and Creationism, posted by messadivoce on September 6, 2005, at 23:17:37
> It takes a lot of faith to believe that everything from the human body to penguins to platypuses (sp?) just happened, randomly and without a Designer. I think it takes more faith to believe that than it does to believe in a Creator. Either theory takes a tremendous amount of faith.
>
I don't think so. It takes faith to believe the words of the Bible are infallible, but scientists develop theories based on observable facts. They state their observations/experiments in a way that can be replicated by someone else. If no one else gets the same result, or if the results are widely varying, then their positions are weakened. Scientists use observations to develop theories. The definition of "theory" is different when used in science. It means an explanation of observations that makes predictions.One of the most difficult parts of evolutionary theory is getting a grip on the *vast* spans of time involved. Most people can imagine a century, and a thousand years is 10 centuries, 10,000 years is 100 centuries, 100,000 years is 1,000 centuries... after a while your imagination fails you.
> Not to say I don't believe God couldn't use evolution if he wanted to...
>
That's the position of Catholics.> Putting all evidence aside, from either theory, I just find it really hard to believe that everything that exists in earth was a random series of events. It's not out of the realm of possibility that a beautiful designed sculpture or painting was made by someone. Why is it out of the realm of possibility that our fabulous bodies were created by someone? I don't understand why that's not a viable alternative.
>
It's outside the realm of science because all the answers are the same: God made it so. You can't predict anything from that; consequently, it's not science.Maybe your body is fabulous, but mine isn't. Look through some medical books for seriously unfabulous bodies.
> If scientists are looking for God's literal "fingerprints" then they aren't there. If they are trying to "prove" the existance of God, they can't.
>
> But if they try to prove the lack of a God, they can't to it either. So they have to have faith that no God exists.
>
I don't quite understand your point. Science and metaphysics are different. Many, if not most, scientists are believers of one stripe or another.> It takes faith either way, Evolutionist or Creationist.
>
I think they exist in separate spheres of inquiry.
>
>
I.
poster:Ilene
thread:551237
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20050903/msgs/551732.html