YES. Vestigial organs, homologous structures people. Look them up. Creation is based solely on religion, and is completely theoretical. Just because you don't observe volcanoes erupting doesn't mean that doesn't happen.
you just went against STWOW by saying that. and you cant prove that by the definition of creation that we were created by God is a false statement. and also you kind of went with me that just because we dont see something doesnt mean it isnt true. we cant see God now, it doesnt mean He doesnt exist and created us.
Notice the "" marks? When I said made up, I meant thought, even if it was not even for a second you think about/through/(excluded) everything.
I assume this was addressed to me? • STWOW is not me. I am not debating using the argument he brought up. • The bolded portion is worded funny to me, but I'll try to decipher. Well... I think I'll wait for you to clarify. Anyway, I'll reword my point. The main idea is that since religion as a whole is not proven fact, neither are the creation stories proven fact. That is why they are theoretical (ay, you know what I mean). • No, my point does not really help you. Volcanoes are known to erupt, people have seen them erupt, there are facts about eruptions, etc. God has not been observed in such a manner; the only things we have to base our view of God on is our feelings and religious texts.
STWOW, you do realize theory is stronger than fact so the statement Evolution is fact, where as religion is theory is actually an argument against yourself.
well i gotta go watch tv so i'll finish this tomorrow... and whoa the tables turn with Nitrous's comment.
Maybe because theories can be remodified to fit new revelations in scientific experimentation. If even one part of a fact is wrong then the whole idea is false because it is no longer a fact. Maybe that was what nitrous was talking about. And this goes along with the whole debate. Creationism can't be wrong, about anything because if one part of creationism is wrong then the whole idea is uprooted and comes into question. Evolution however has gone through many changes and modifies itself to fit new evidence.
Well then I will word that differently, Religion/God are thoughts that can't be proven to be true, Evolution is Fact.
Now if we do the amazing and spectacular way of remembering more than 1 post at a time we can combine my two posts. "People, atoms, fish, squirrels, apples, oxygen, gravity, evolution, and the Earth are made up, yet they exist" because they are not thoughts, they are fact, they exist. God is a thought, but God is not fact, God does not exist. Your logic is flawed.
Matter is a Fact, but it's origins are not... People, atoms, fish, squirrels, apples, oxygen, gravity, evolution, and the Earth are fact, yet their origins are not. So tell me this, why does God need to be the odd one out.
True. But if the situation was explained using facts, do you think the majority would balk and say that's unlikely? I only say this because the idea of God is too "far-fetched" for some as opposed to saying climate can change due to volcanoes erupting. But that's a good point, God could be possible in that manner. I wasn't trying to say (at all) that God couldn't have made the universe there. I was saying that Nate couldn't say evolution wasn't real based on the fact that he hadn't observed it. I was defending evolution rather than attacking... religion. Creationism I will stab wholeheartedly.
Why does God not exist, they discovered matter. They discovered fish, they discovered gravity. All that has happened is that we have not yet discovered God.
Theres such a difference though, between discovering something that is on earth, and physical to something spiritual and not physically on earth... or in this realm. Unless God appears before us, he can't ever be proven to exist. hence why religion is based on faith and not fact.
Who is to say we are not in this realm already, perhaps that is why he is our God... Maybe we are already spiritual and not physical, living in a realm or reality. I have faith, I will always have faith, but perhaps God wants us to find him. We can't say religion is right, but we can't say it's wrong as well.
Faith created God, meaning our Faith? So what you are saying is we created God? Makes sense, we created God in our imagination (not saying that he is just an imagination), better worded is we created God in our minds. But, God created us? But, we created God.
Scientific theories are collections of evidence. Evidence, in turn, is a collection of facts. I say my pen is god. A word of advice, my friend, stick to the general, colloquial definition the population gives it. Because all arguments henge upon the concept that what we are debating must be defined. By joining this thread you have signed a mental contract that you will debate dutifully and faithfully. Stop being an asshole.