#Original #GIFS #Funny #Picdumps #Animals #Creative #Photography #History #Celebs #Tech #Movies #Music


#News #Science #Interesting #Space #Sports #TVShows #SciFi #Memes #Gaming #Quotes #Sexy #Ask
PROTIP:  Press the and keys to navigate the slideshow.
I lean more towards evolution because there are more facts to support it where as creationism is based on religious beliefs and faith.
Report this topic to moderators This post already reported
-3Remove
-2Remove
-1Remove
+25
+1Remove
+2Remove
+3Remove
Views: 5549
Posted: 2009-10-12 17:45:38

Responses (82) // Sorted by points

  • mienftw - replied 2009-10-12 18:20:14
    +4
    I believe in God but not religion.
    Reply
    Report
    • bobiffer0123 - replied 2009-10-12 18:56:19
      +1
      awesome, i approve
      Reply
      Report
    • deadboy613 - replied 2009-10-12 19:05:13
      +1
      i believe in god, not in the institution we have come to know as religion. i look at the world around us, and cannot believe this is all by chance. everything is so intricate and perfect (when its not interferred with by humans) and works so well with eachother that it couldnt have not been intelligent design.
      Reply
      Report
      • Logos385 - replied 2009-10-13 18:45:18
        +1
        Chance and by naturalistic means are two very, very different things...
        Reply
        Report
      • defmid26 - replied 2009-11-17 10:43:12
        +1
        religion is the doctrine of the church to be specific
        Reply
        Report
  • Armork66 - replied 2009-10-12 19:02:54
    +4
    I am atheist so i am going for evolution--but i repect others beliefs and if someday they can prove that it was actually creationism, then slap my face on an epic failure poster
    Reply
    Report
  • minoshman1 - replied 2009-10-29 05:37:05
    +3
    I've been an atheist since I was 12. I see no reason to follow a religion simply because my forefathers did the same, nor do I see why I should believe a compilation of what look like short stories . anthologies put together in some random self conflicting book of ultimate wtfness
    Reply
    Report
  • ninjapoptart - replied 2009-10-13 20:24:05
    +2
    I personally believe in evolution, I think things were made so "perfectly" through natural means (based on ghettoshen's argument), through nature. I guess my philosophy is that life will always find a way, and all it takes is that one moment when things are just right (like the earth being the perfect distance from the sun), it can spark amazing things, like life. And somehow, that life, that single-celled organism that splits and transforms, can lead to even bigger things. I just can't wrap my head around the idea of some infinitely powerful being just creating everything one day and....here we are.

    Of course, I don't think any amount of scientific exploration or religion will ever find the "truth". I think that kind of knowledge is just too big for our little heads, lol.
    Reply
    Report
    • Kradon666 - replied 2009-10-28 07:18:08
      +2
      I saw something on Discovery channel a few months ago, and it said that a solar system setup like the one we have is very rare. To have a planet like Earth the perfect distance from the sun, and to have a planet like Jupiter to pull in almost all of the stray meteorites and comments is almost impossible to find anywhere else. I'm not saying this religiously either. I used to go to church, and one of the few things that I actually remember is that there is other life out there that is just like us. The fact that we haven't found anybody yet doesn't mean that they don't exist. It simply means that we can't see far enough into space, or we haven't looked in the right places. Alot of the other solar systems that scientists have found have a planet the size of Jupiter the same distance away from its own sun as Mercury is to ours. Someday technology will grow to the point where we can actually go out to these other solar systems and look around from there for any evidence of other life. They are out there. Its very improbable that we are in fact alone in the universe. The universe, as we know it, is never ending.
      Reply
      Report
      • DustyTurtle - replied 2009-11-28 16:00:09
        +2
        yes, I've heard those stray comments can be quite dangerous
        Reply
        Report
  • Stoy - replied 2009-10-12 18:08:47
    +1
    same, evolution all the way. (even though i respect others beliefs)
    Reply
    Report
  • Logos385 - replied 2009-10-12 18:19:37
    +1
    Unquestionably evolution. Creationism is unscientific, unsubstantiated, and generally ridiculous.

    I honestly have no respect for beliefs that ignore over half of the current fields of science.
    Reply
    Report
    • Responses are below viewing threshold (show responses)
      -1
  • fellage - replied 2009-10-12 22:25:25
    +1
    Evolution.
    Reply
    Report
  • Math - replied 2009-10-13 00:51:04
    +1
    Anybody got any evidence of Creationism?
    Reply
    Report
    • ghettoshen - replied 2009-10-13 19:07:38
      +3
      Hmmm....How about you try to make a monkey evolve into a human? And scientists have found no proof that we actually are related. And also why haven't they found a fossilized human that's literally half monkey? And also how do you expect the earth to be perfectly in position so that we don't burn and we don't freeze. And how do you explain the fact that plants just happen to breathe in carbon dioxide and breathe out oxygen and we just happen to do the opposite so we always have a supply of air? And how do you explain males and females to have the right body parts to reproduce? And how do you explain the human body just being perfect? I believe in adaptation but not evolution. And for you evolutionists, I'm sure you've heard these arguments before and you can't prove them wrong but I sure as hell can't prove your ideas wrong either so until that day comes I respect your views, but as for me? I'm Creationism all the way.
      Reply
      Report
      • overboard - replied 2009-10-14 07:26:53
        +5
        If plants didn't breathe in CO2 and we didn't breathe in O2 then we would have evolved into a completely different being, or, at the very least, our breathing apparatus would have evolved differently. They didn't just happen like that, perfectly balanced to bounce off and use one another. We evolved to take advantage of the oxygen rich atmosphere, an atmosphere largely a result of the already existing plant life. The proof is there, this makes it a FACT not a theory (it cannot be both).

        With regards to the human body: it's not perfect. The closest 'part' to being perfect is the eye, an organ replicated in almost exactly the same way over a number of species as evolution so very nearly got it right. But even that is not 100% (eg, the blind spot). Appart from minor imperfections like this, how do you explain away the appendix, an organ that we no longer use and is infact larger in rabbits than us due to our lack of dependance on it over the years. Equally, we no longer require wisdom teeth and yet they continue to give many of us a huge amount of pain. Our body is not perfect, infact it is continuing to evolve.
        Reply
        Report
        • ghettoshen - replied 2009-10-14 14:31:31
          +2
          In all realism Logos, I can't win against you. You base your belief in science and I in faith. I literally have zero scientific evidence that creationism is real but I do have faith and that's what makes my life easier, believing that there's a God that created me and you that I can take my problems to. You may think that's stupid but that's how I live. And if I'm wrong I'll live a good life anyway.

          By the way, you have given me a run for my money on this subject, I've never had such a deep explanation about evolution (I'm a freshman in highschool and I'm sure you have some higher education than me).
          Reply
          Report
          • Logos385 - replied 2009-10-14 21:24:45
            +1
            Overboard's overview regarding the O2 and CO2 situation was spot-on, and better than I could've articulated it. I also agree with his statement about the body. Well done sir, if I could applaud over text I would.

            However, Overboard, evolution most certainly is both theory and fact. Two different definitions of the same word, describing two separate parts of one concept, have two different labels: one theory, one fact.

            Evolution as a fact: Allelic frequency in a population changes over time.
            Evolution as a theory: "Allelic frequency in a population changes over time" because of selection, genetic drift, predation, etc etc etc.

            Evolution as fact describes an observed phenomenon, while evolution as theory describes how that phenomenon functions. The "theory" connotation of evolution is a model taking into account hundreds of thousands of facts, all of which agree with the model. Observed speciation, predation, genetic trends and changes, genome sequencing, the fossil record, and many more facts support the theory/model of evolution.

            Evolution is a fact/theory in the same way gravity is. Things fall to the Earth: that is a fact called gravity. Mass is attracted to mass because of the bending of space: that is a theory called gravity. This is what I'm getting at.

            Now, ghettoshen: Go ahead and believe things on faith, but make sure you don't attempt to say that your beliefs are based on anything but faith. To believe something on faith and then erroneously say that your understanding is based in science is not the way to go about things.

            If you care about faith, go for it. But if you care about reality and science, try doing a lot of research into this kind of subject. It's fun, informative, and really easily done. All it takes is a google search! : D.

            PS. Age truly does not matter, what matters is the willingness of the mind to search for the information. I'm simply in High School as well. Thanks for the discussion.
            Reply
            Report
            • defmid26 - replied 2009-11-17 10:54:43
              +1
              Now that is truly a valid and reasonable debate on the topic, so I applaud all parties involved. I enjoyed reading the statements in the above posts.
              Reply
              Report
      • Logos385 - replied 2009-10-13 19:47:42
        +2
        1. Monkeys did not evolve into humans, chimpanzees did, and this is well documented. Simply do a search for "hominid evolution" and you will have what you need. There is an abundance of proof, the strongest of which in my opinion is Genome Sequencing, including ERVs (Endogenic Retro-Viruses).

        2. A fossilized human being half a monkey would, in fact, completely falsify the theory of evolution. That's all it would take. Having a human torso and monkey legs (as I assume you mean) or vice versa is not at all what the theory of evolution predicts. If you think so, I suggest a visit to talkorigins.org.

        3. Earth has life on it because it has the conditions necessary for life's development. There are billions upon billions upon billions of planets, it only follows, probabilistically, that at least one of them would have Earth-like characteristics. Like Earth does.

        4. This is a result of photosynthesis, and the development of chlorophyll/chloroplasts through naturalistic means. It wasn't always this way.

        5. Once again, these body parts were selected for. There is no "just right" method of reproduction, there are millions of variations on the activity in the animal kingdom, and they all work just fine.

        6. The human body is not perfect. What designer would ever put a necessary respiratory opening anywhere near a consumption orifice? And cancer, a defect that occurs because of the body itself, is astoundingly common, and an obvious defect in the body's "design."

        7. Adaptation (or micro-evolution) and Macroevolution are the same phenomenon. One just takes more time.

        8. I am pretty sure I soundly trounced your process. And no, you cannot prove the entire scientific community and the 200,000+ scientific articles authored on the subject of evolutionary biology wrong. I promise.

        9. Your lack of understanding about the subject is shown by your inability to distinguish between evolution and cosmology.

        10. I am no more an "evolutionist" than I am a "gravity-ist" or a "germ-ist." I subscribe to a scientifically validated fact, not a baseless belief system.
        Reply
        Report
        • ghettoshen - replied 2009-10-14 05:07:01
          +2
          You rely on scientific theory not fact. What you believe is fact is actually in all reality theory. There is no way you can say 100% that you're correct and I can't say I'm positive either, but there's one thing we have in common, we both have faith in our belief. And that can make us friends or enemies, personally, I choose friend its up to you now.

          P.S. Sorry if I personally offended you by calling you an evolutionist. I'll just say you have high faith, which is good by the way. :)
          Reply
          Report
          • Logos385 - replied 2009-10-14 07:08:26
            +1
            Evolution is both theory and fact. A scientific theory means, "an explanation of concept/idea that is supported by evidence and/or many experiments/trials and is widely accepted by the scientific community." This is far different from what theory means in the colloquial sense. The fact of evolution is that there is change in the allelic frequency in a population over time, the theory involves natural selection and describing the process. The theory has 150 years of evidentiary basis.

            Gravity is also a "theory." Germs? A "theory." Plate tectonics? A "theory." Cells. A "theory." Atomic theory, molecular bonding, radioactivity, and even matter. These are all scientific theories. If you wish to disregard all of these as well because they are just, "theories," feel free, but I would advise against it, for they built the society which functions today.

            There is no way I can say I'm 100% correct, but that is simply because nothing can ever be proven 100% in the philosophical sense. In that sense I'm 99.9% correct, the .1% being the chance that reality is not reality.

            I do not have faith, I have reasoned opinions based on observable fact and evidence. I provided many rebuttals to your statements above, and your best response was that I have faith. I view this as a failure to rebut.

            I have nothing against you as a person, as a friend if you wish, as a human being. However, against your Young Earth Creationist viewpoint? I will forever fight. Simply because it is based upon scientific ignorance.
            Reply
            Report
            • Jofus1992 - replied 2010-01-16 04:25:36
              +1
              Why can't people believe in evolutionary-creation? I just think that of is too complex to just happen by chance. I think god pushed things along.
              Reply
              Report
        • defmid26 - replied 2009-11-17 10:56:04
          +1
          What if the human body is imperfectly perfect?

          And the arguments above are not scientific ignorance. We know the facts and interpret them in a different way.
          Reply
          Report
      • Zink - replied 2009-12-03 09:29:57
        +1
        zeitgeistmovie.com
        Reply
        Report
        • Logos385 - replied 2009-12-05 19:53:10
          +1
          Zeitgeist can be interesting... but much of it is under-researched or fabricated. Ignore the 9/11 part everyone... please... so deluded.
          Reply
          Report
  • Zink - replied 2009-10-13 09:55:04
    +1
    evolution for sure.
    Reply
    Report
  • ISayLOLTooMuch - replied 2009-10-13 11:42:41
    +1
    i not too believing in religion but im open to views and the bible seems like a good fiction read tbh.
    Reply
    Report
  • AbLaEyXarea - replied 2009-10-14 07:38:35
    +1
    EVOLUTION 100% i need evidence of creationism
    Reply
    Report
    • defmid26 - replied 2009-11-17 10:58:10
      +1
      creationism isnt based on fact, so therefore there is no evidence
      Reply
      Report
  • marlondo - replied 2009-10-14 08:59:38
    +1
    i think it was luck!!!
    Reply
    Report
  • Math - replied 2009-10-19 11:35:43
    +1
    I have a problem with people who can't or don't want to see the evidence. The evidence for evolution is equal to that of the theory of gravity. Medicines have been developed using the theory that save peoples' lives. All the data that has been found since Darwin of which he had no knowledge has reinforced his theory (such as DNA).
    Reply
    Report
  • reaperexe - replied 2009-10-22 06:45:51
    +1
    evolution all the way!!! we control our own destinys not something that people who rape kids say they talk to daily evolution..
    Reply
    Report
  • defmid26 - replied 2009-10-26 20:56:16
    +1
    Reply
    Report
    • Kradon666 - replied 2009-10-26 21:02:10
      +1
      I approve of your post. Lots of very good points.
      Reply
      Report
      • defmid26 - replied 2009-10-26 21:03:37
        +1
        it helps that i am good at science, am open minded, and my mom is a preacher (so i have access to books on theology) but most of it is extrapolation from basic ideas
        Reply
        Report
        • Logos385 - replied 2009-10-26 21:52:18
          +2
          I approve as well: well done, sir. : ).
          Reply
          Report
      • Responses are below viewing threshold (show responses)
        -1
  • Joec2009 - replied 2009-10-28 03:39:22
    +1
    im 100% sure its evolution. but who knows
    Reply
    Report
  • Math - replied 2009-10-29 06:01:07
    +1
    Christianity: One woman's lie about having an affair that got seriously out of hand.
    Reply
    Report
  • cmlh2012 - replied 2009-11-07 12:37:26
    +1
    Just to stir up the pot a little bit. Scientist's have said that the chances of evolution happening the way it did are the same as if you covered the Earth 5 times over with dimes(American 10 cent coin) and painted ONE of them red, blind folded someone, spun them around, placed them anywhere on the face of the earth and they then finding that dime. i personally side with intelligent design
    Reply
    Report
    • Logos385 - replied 2009-11-17 07:11:03
      +1
      That's simply untrue, please provide a source. The chances of evolution occurring, as much to our human knowledge, is 1, because it has occurred. We have no way of saying that there is any possibility other than evolution occurring. To make a probability less than one, there must be two observable options. The only observable option is "Evolution has occurred on Earth." "Evolution has not occurred on Earth" has not been observed.

      Also, even if Evolution is actually invalidated (which it has not been), ID would still need to pass the test of a scientific theory. So, what's the evidence/why do you side with it?
      Reply
      Report
      • cmlh2012 - replied 2009-11-17 15:21:21
        +1
        I will use God in this but only in place of "intelligent deisgner". Before we look at life on earth, we must look at the solar system. If the Earth was 10 miles closer to the sun, it would be to hot. 10 miles farther away, it would be to cold. How, except very small chance and luck, could we have a very large planet like Jupiter to hold the asteroids, that could bombard our planet, back with gravity. Now on to live on Earth. Cell Theory says that all cells come from other cells. So, where did the first cell come from? This is what my high school chemistry teacher has said -"Where did Humans come from? chimps. Where did chimps come from? some ancient mammal. Where did the anciet mammal come from? some reptile. where did the reptile come from? an amphibian. where did the amphibian come from? fish. where did fish come from? an amoeba. where did the amoeba come from? specks of dust that decided to be cells." The point that i had orginally made came from the same chemistry teacher and he was quoting a popular science magazine, i believe.

        I believe that God created our universe, planet, and such. I believe that he created each creature uniquely an individually(species wise). I believe that he planted the fossil evidence as a test of our faith in Him. Believe what you like but you cannot answer the question "Where did the first cell come from.?" And if you can please enlighten us all.
        Reply
        Report
        • Logos385 - replied 2009-11-17 20:57:20
          +1
          That first statement is fallacious. The "Goldilocks Zone" is between .725 AU and 3.0 AU, roughly. This translates to being in the range of 67.425 million and 279 million miles from the sun. The Earth is a mean distance of 93 million miles from the sun. This means that if the Earth was 25.575 million miles closer to the sun, we would have a problem. Also, if the Earth was 186 million miles farther away from the sun, we would have another fiasco. The Earth varies MUCH more than 10 miles in distance from the sun during its non-spherical orbit. Aside from that, yes, Jupiter is a large gravity suck. But that has nothing to do with design. Also, if collisions are a factor in design, why is the Andromeda galaxy headed straight for our tiny, lonely Milky Way?

          The first cells came through an immensely complicated process called abiogenesis. This is a growing and exciting field of study, which has proven many things.
          1.) Amino acids form spontaneously in many possible pre-biotic Earth environments
          2.) Vacuoles (essentially a cell sack) form spontaneously in temperatures the pre-biotic Earth's ocean(s) would possess
          3.) Nucleotides exist in many more, less complicated forms than DNA and RNA, and are inducted into vacuoles through completely nonbiological processes.

          Although it's difficult to imagine, the process of the beginning of life was most likely not as improbable as one might think. See, on Youtube, Cdk007's fantastic Abiogenesis video.

          Once again, evidence? And really, the fossil record is a test of faith? How about all light we receive from sources greater than 6,000 lightyears away? Is that just for our enjoyment (consequently making our entire universe an elaborate deception)?

          And then again, how about the fact that over 99.54% of our Earth would kill human life rather quickly? And the fact that about 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999927% of our Universe would kill human life just as fast, if not faster? And the fact that we humans, ourselves, have quite imperfect bodies, organs, and immune systems?

          Also the fact that every field of science relating to biology supports evolution?

          You don't necessarily have to answer the questions above, just the objections to your specific post.

          Thanks for the ongoing conversation, it's greatly appreciated.
          Reply
          Report
  • babypuntphresh - replied 2009-11-17 07:17:39
    +1
    creationism. no proof, just faith.
    Reply
    Report
  • DennisDee - replied 2010-05-07 07:56:15
    +1
    i think that if there is a god, its not like everyone pictures him or described but too many people analyze this too much, does it really matter if there is....he's not going to help me get a baddass car and chick...
    Reply
    Report
  • Bekenel - replied 2010-05-07 08:08:56
    +1
    evolutionism ftw! Seriously though, all the way through history 'religious' nutjobs, christian, muslim and others with axes and bombs have caused havoc to people who believe differently. This is why I have turned away from religion
    Reply
    Report
  • johnecash - replied 2010-05-07 10:36:39
    +1
    as far as i know both are still theories or educated guesses. when the facts come out i will take a side until then i like to hear it all to make up my own mind.
    Reply
    Report
  • BEASTY - replied 2010-05-07 10:52:57
    +1
    evolution dude demotivational poster 1223929352
    Reply
    Report
  • CrazyJay - replied 2010-11-18 07:29:41
    +1
    Well, let's see. Creationism consists of these beliefs, to name a few:
    -The world is less than 10000 years old
    -The world was created in 7 days
    -The first woman who ever lived was created from a man's rib
    -All animals alive today did not decent from common ancestor species, rather they have always looked and behaved as they do now, including humans

    All of which is absolute bullshit and has been proven time and time again as such. The only creationists I've ever met are incredibly weak-minded people who have a nasty habit of ignoring reality, when the reality is:

    -This planet is billions of years old (which we can prove through Uranium dating, or other elements.)
    -Through observation of other species, DNA evidence and fossil evidence (as well as several other methods), we can conclude that not only did animals (this includes humans) evolved from lesser creatures, but continue to do so.

    When it comes right down to it, science is based on fact, while creation on mythology. To even hold them in the same regard or consider them to be equal is an insult, not only to our intelligence, but to the scientific community in general. The scientific theory of evolution is arguably the most well defended, has some of the most evidence supporting it (Also, we find more and more evidence to support it all the time!) as well as being infinitely more interesting than creation. It also shatters the entire Christian belief system. (If there was no Adam and Eve, there's no original sin thus no reason for Jesus to sacrifice himself for our sins.) This is why creationists aren't worth arguing with. They know full well that it destroys their belief system. You'd probably have a more interesting conversation with a brick wall.
    Reply
    Report
  • HippyBoy - replied 2010-11-18 08:50:39
    +1
    Evolution here.
    Reply
    Report
  • spartan123 - replied 2009-11-28 18:37:07
    0
    evolution. theres no such thing as god
    Reply
    Report
  • Responses are below viewing threshold (show responses)
    -2
  • Responses are below viewing threshold (show responses)
    -2

Leave a reply

Upload files