MyAnimeList.net

Forums

Recent Posts | My Watched Topics | My Ignored Topics | Search

Evolution vs Creation
MyAnimeList.net Forum »» Casual Discussion »» Evolution vs Creation

Pages (26) [1] 2 3 » ... Last »
View Poll Results: Are you an evolutionist or a creationist?
Evolutionist
 
129 59.45%
Creationist
 
31 14.29%
I don't care...
 
35 16.13%
Neither of them...
 
9 4.15%
Theistic Evolutionists-meaning they believe in both God and evolution (Eh, I kind of just discovered that this word existed)
 
13 5.99%
Voters: 217

#1
05-01-12, 4:39 AM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 50
The Evolution vs. Creation debate is often referred to as the "Great Debate." It's the emotion-packed question of "Origins" -- why, how, and where did everything come from? 20th century science has made the compelling discovery that, at some point, the universe began. Both sides of the Great Debate now agree that the universe has not existed eternally. However, this is where the agreement ends. As far as the "why" and "how" of the "origin event," this is where the division and contention begin. There are two basic theories in this Great Debate. The first is the historical default - the Creation Model of Origins. This theory maintains that the intricate design permeating all things implies a Designer. The second theory is the more recent, atheistic explanation - the Evolution Model of Origins. This theory postulates that the intricate design permeating all things is a product of random chance and excessive time.

TLTR stuff


EDIT: 04/05


Modified by Edition, 05-04-12, 4:52 AM
 
#2
05-01-12, 4:51 AM

Offline
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 2063
I believe in evolution rather than god, but I do not necessarily believe that in the big bang. The big bang is just a theory, and so is evolution, but I feel that evolution has much more evidence to back it up than the big bang in my opinion.

The big bang may have happened, but I am not completely convinced. As to what I believe started it all, I don't believe in anything. There is not enough evidence to support anything, so I don't have much of an opinion on it.
Modified by DarkShards, 05-01-12, 5:55 AM

"I like to expose what people hide. I'm an intellectual rapist." - Furudo Erika
 
#3
05-01-12, 4:59 AM

Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1696
It certainly is a great debate; it is among the oldest mysteries mankind has ever pondered over, not to mention among the most discussed topics in social interaction, second only perhaps to the meaning of life.

And yet, it is one which this forum has never discussed before. To think that an online community of thousands, with perhaps hundreds of active members in about four or five years, not one of them has thought to ask this very question. Even now, when things have slowed down a bit here, we stil probably have fifty or so active members. So many people have been involved here, and yet none of them has ever thought to ask this most fundamental of questions.

How ironic, eh?
Beg to report, Sir...
 
#4
05-01-12, 5:06 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1833
For the sake of precision, these theories aren't exactly opposites: evolution claim is about evolution, the origin of life still being hypothetical to this hour. And the big bang just goes back 10^-34 second after the universe energy started expanding. Before that, anything could have happened, including a god creation, buddha jiz or whatever. We just don't know.
 
#5
05-01-12, 5:22 AM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2481
Both sides need a chance of actually winning to be a debate.

This is merely an argument between people willing to think and people willing to believe what they are told without asking difficult questions requiring proof.

Science doesn't have all the answers, but at least scientists are willing to look.

The religious have turned off their minds, and they neither want proof nor do they wish to ask questions.

I'd rather have a debate with a rock.
While not technically anime, currently I am a big fan of Hatsune Miku.
At least I can go see her in concert.
 
#6
05-01-12, 5:27 AM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 132
I'm sticking with whatever scientists have determined to be true. I don't rule out the possibility of a god existing (in fact I think the existence of a god might be cool, who knows?), but the Abrahamic god Yahweh and everything documented in The Bible simply don't work with what I've been taught in school about Earth and the universe.

And as DarkShards implied, the poll is flawed. Some people believe in a god and also believe in the big bang. A god may have designed the structure and variables that would eventually lead to a universe harboring life. But I'm not going to believe in that god because I see no proof for it to exist. Belief without evidence or experience is foolish.
 
#7
05-01-12, 5:43 AM

Offline
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 6368
As much as I like the idea of having an almighty god and heaven and such.

God to me is like an imaginary friend that people can choose to have, much like the little fairy inside my bottom closet. Her name is Eight btw, and she's been around since my grandparent's time.
 
#8
05-01-12, 5:44 AM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 13847
Uh, it's not really a scientific debate. Evolution is pretty much it, creation as explained in any creation myth I can think of is already impossible no matter how you look at it and cannot be considered anything but a fairytale. And stuff like intelligent design is just brain rotting crap that are not even worthy of being called pseudoscience.
Evolution is simply irrefutable at this point, and anyone that whines about it doesn't even come close to having a scientific proof to disprove it with.

Whether or not some god is behind the creation the world, it all surely happened through natural processes like evolution.
Eigi man ek þá lǫg jómsvikinga ef ek kviði við bana eða mæla ek æðruorð. Eitt sinn skal hverr deyja
 
#9
05-01-12, 6:03 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 271
While the Big Bang theory has some evidence to back it up, I don't rule out the possibility of a god or deity. Well, whatever. I care more about my fantasy and imagination than the truth we'll probably never know for sure.
I see dead people.
 
05-01-12, 6:03 AM

Online
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 2723
1. What does evolution have to do with the big bang?
2. Since when is evolution an "atheistic explanation"?
3. What the hell is an evolutionist?

Evolution has been accepted by religious people as well you know, rather than deny the facts they claim it's dictated by God. The people who don't believe it are the insane Creationists who take the Bible far too literally, some even going as far to believe the Earth is 6,000 years old when there is tons of factual evidence to prove them wrong.

It's not a scientific debate, it's idiots ignoring facts and pretending it's a debate.
 
05-01-12, 6:07 AM

Offline
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 11212
What a trainreck of a question. is this when they say half knowledge is worse than ignorance?
Big bang and evolution theories aren't the same thing and also none of that excludes the idea of God ether.
 
05-01-12, 6:17 AM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 2051
Yet another reason why this poll is flawed: many creationists, who believe a God or god or gods created humans sapient and created many other animals as they are today, and don't believe in the Horrendous Space Kablooie, still believe in evolution or at least microevolution.

And then you have scientists like Einstein that believed in Deus sive Natura, and some even that believe in the Abrahamic God and try to reconcile their personal beliefs with further research.
 
05-01-12, 6:21 AM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 1423
I dunno what's so great about it. Creation has no evidence, Evolution has. And yes, as people mentioned - Evolution has nothing to do with the Big Bang.

We might never know how it all happened. What's so bad about not knowing?

"Living is what scares me. Dying is easy."
-Charles Manson

 
05-01-12, 6:52 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 2663
Evolution and the big bang are two completely unrelated theories *faceplam* Pick up a damn science book some time.

Oh and just in case youre wondering the old version of the big bang was thrown out by the person who created it. The current version is called "infinite inflation". Basically our universe evolved from other older universes that expanded then collapsed in on themselves and created a new universe from the remains of the old possibly building in complexity over time. Not only that but there are other alternative theories of the start of the universe and not a single one of them needs any god in the equation.

WTF is with this "atheistic explanation" ? The person who created the starts of the theory of the big bang was a catholic priest.
 
05-01-12, 6:58 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 5943
AnnoKano said:
And yet, it is one which this forum has never discussed before.

Oh you....
 
05-01-12, 6:59 AM

Offline
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1950
Baman said:
Uh, it's not really a scientific debate. Evolution is pretty much it, creation as explained in any creation myth I can think of is already impossible no matter how you look at it and cannot be considered anything but a fairytale. And stuff like intelligent design is just brain rotting crap that are not even worthy of being called pseudoscience.
Evolution is simply irrefutable at this point, and anyone that whines about it doesn't even come close to having a scientific proof to disprove it with.

Whether or not some god is behind the creation the world, it all surely happened through natural processes like evolution.

^ This. I mean, we've observed it happening. There is no debate. The theory of evolution is as about controversial as the theory of gravity (which is also "just a theory").
 
05-01-12, 7:08 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1077
Edition said:
Evolutionists reason, we cannot see the Creator, we cannot hear the Creator, and we cannot touch, taste or smell the Creator. Therefore, we are unable to test for the Creator with any form of scientific equipment developed thus far.

It's a retarded argument for a retarded question.
Edition said:
Creationists retort, we cannot see, hear, touch, taste, or smell the human mind.We cannot test for the human mind with any form of scientific equipment developed thus far. When we run an electroencephalogram, we are measuring salt flow and electrical activity within the human brain. We cannot so much as even locate the human mind.

I wouldn't write 'mind' but rather 'consciousness.' This is a whole other argument. This is a problem of neuroscience, not natural selection, evolution, etc... which are ecological theories that make sense and 'seem natural.'
Edition said:
Yet we watch as human carcasses run about, making order of disorder, conscious decisions according to subconscious criteria. We see the design and complexity that result from the operation of the brain through the invisible realm known as the mind. Thus, we know with certainty that the human mind exists.

I would make it categorical that we do NOT argue for existence of 'existence' itself, nature, consciousness, oneself, etc...
Edition said:
Therefore, it's absolutely logical for Creationists to postulate the existence of a Creator based upon the same "evidence." The design we see all around us came from one, grand concept, and such a concept can only come from a complex Mind. Furthermore, the mathematical and physical laws inherent in all things (including, most dramatically, the Laws of Thermodynamics and the Law of Cause and Effect) effectively validate this evidentiary claim.

And therefore, your argument is subjectively flawed and has no evidence to speak of. There's also no 'mathematical law' inherent.

「みんながいるからだ。」 - 棗鈴
 
05-01-12, 7:09 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 1833
AbstractCalamity said:

^ This. I mean, we've observed it happening. There is no debate. The theory of evolution is as about controversial as the theory of gravity (which is also "just a theory").

I actually like to imagine tiny imps pulling down things.
 
05-01-12, 7:11 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 2663
Yeah evolution isn't so much a debate as its more a intervention for people in denial about it. Although I do agree that evolution in a few stages in some species seems unusually rushed but im no expert and I dont make assumptions based on that but its certainly not enough to deny it.

Should i mention that young earth creationism has a counterpart known as Theistic-evolution? People who believe this think a god created and guided the big bang and evolution. Theistic evolution is the alternative of Naturalistic Evolution which is the normal evolution we all know about. Please note theistic-evolution isnt scientific its just an attempt to merge science with religion via god of the gaps.
 
05-01-12, 7:16 AM

Offline
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 9370
They don't exactly contradict each other. Evolution cannot explain the initial burst of creation, nor can creation explain the accumulation of changes in different species.
 
Top
Pages (26) [1] 2 3 » ... Last »
Help     FAQ     About     Contact     Terms     Privacy     AdChoices