Evolution is now A FACT OF LIFE

[chad_tukes]

---

I notice chad.

that doesn't mean it's not out there
--- pure faith? hmmm i have the same statement tooo... so whats the difference? we don't have evidence yet you insist? why insist? thats very funny chad... you are moving from science-to-faith and use this faith-to-become-science, don't treat science like dogma.... same with malic... evolution is half science half faith... creatoinism is partly science and more faith.

We can agree on the science part... we can never agree on that faith... hmmm

i wouldn't call it FAITH, i'd call it confidence. you have to choose words carefully because when you say it's faith---you'd put a religious touch into it which obviously is not the case with evolution. it's purely scientific. you find a fossil, you gather data, you solve a huge puzzle, that means the missing data is out there; it just hasn't been found. your theory, on the other hand, does not have anything to start with... so why bother?

[regnauld]

What I really love about EVOLUTION is Universal Evolution.

Universal Evolution is a study of evolution formulated by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and Julian Huxley that describes the gradual development of the Universe from subatomic particles to human society, considered by Teilhard as the last stage. (see Gaia ).

[chad_tukes]

Theory... hahay. Brad all theory are still questionable...

for one's your big ban theory, was shred by the string theory + relativity + .... remember parallel universe, and whats amazing is they had DISPROVEN IT IN 30min... after a DECADES OF STUDY. Sorry chad you must have read the old journals... upgrading helps.

i agree, all theories are questionable that's why they're called theories. creationists are gonna ask us "well, everything's gotta have to come from something". our answer to that would be "we do not know that something YET"---so we formulate theories.

creationists would rather have an "answer" with absolutely NO SUPPORT then to have to do some work and find out for ourselves. laziness? hmmm...

[unsay_ngalan_nimo]

the CONFLICT is that evotionists do not accept the idea of an intelligent designer. if you lay the ID concept down the table then that would contradict the idea in the first place.

all evolutionists think that way? or just a handful?

[schmuck]

all evolutionists think that way? or just a handful?

that applies to athiests who accept evolution.

catholics on the other hand, believe that god hand a hand in starting off evolution.

[chad_tukes]

that applies to athiests who accept evolution.

catholics on the other hand, believe that god hand a hand in starting off evolution.

that is really not the case. because when you talk about Intelligent Design, you're talking about Creationism. the ID term is basically Creationism re-branded to sound less biblical.

[schmuck]

that is really not the case. because when you talk about Intelligent Design, you're talking about Creationism. the ID term is basically Creationism re-branded to sound less biblical.

I agree there is a conflict. But this conflict is only percieved by the athiests.

The theists who accept evolution and also accept that god/ID had a hand in it. They can not see this conflict, for which, I credit cognitive dissonance.

I'm just saying, that not all evolutionists have a conflict with the idea of an ID. A theist-evolutionist does exist.

[chad_tukes]

there certainly are Christians who believe in Evolution. i'm not saying there aren't, i'm just saying that the intelligent designer concept is where creationists draw their arguments upon.

[regnauld]

there certainly are Christians who believe in Evolution. i'm not saying there aren't, i'm just saying that the intelligent designer concept is where creationists draw their arguments upon.

The ID is part of EVOLUTION...it EVOLVES too!

[schmuck]

"Enough with all your inquisitive questions! The ID did it. Period."

^ basically sums up my view of creationism