Evolution vs Religion

I have heard a good argument recently.
I think they should be separated.

Evolution is a study of science, which you can accept or reject (your choice)

Religion to me is what you believe in. (which is not science)

What do you think?

 

Evolution is scientifically provable.

Religion (almost 100% of the time) isn't.

They are entirely different in my eyes.

 

I accept evolution, my reason, there is too much proof!

 

Which evolution are you talking about, here? There are several types, the most common being Natural Selection and Common Descent... >.> Natural Selection does not conflict with religion at all, whereas Common Descent does. (In some interpretations, anyway.)

 

Actually, Evolution doesn't have a lot of proof at all.

The only 100% physical evidence that exists is fossils, and Darwin's finches at the Galapagos Islands. In which their beak's change shape every generation in response to the seed size (the food they eat). Then again, that's closer to natural selection, but still. Same concept in both ways.

 

I would say that you guys got it switched around. Evolution is more of a fantasy explanation of how we got here. Biblical truth is much more scientific. Makes a lot more sense.

 

Show me any passage from the bible that is provable. PHYSICALLY provable.

 

Whoa whoa, what?

Evolutionary factors like Natural Selection and Genetic Drift have been proven, my friend. Where is the 'scientific' proof that God made the world in seven days?

 

Noah's arc and the great flood.

Chi-ca-chow!


To answer above poster; where is the proof the world was made by rocks crashing into eachother?

 

Wow.

Noah's arc wasn't even "Noah's Arc". It was a remake of a flood that happened to a farmer in Mesopotamia.

It happened, but a lot of it isn't entirely true.

 

I'll take the Big Bang Theory over Creation Theory, any day.

And the point I was debating was not to be taken literally. My point was: How is the Biblical explanation of Creation *more* scientific than the Big Bang, which is actually conjectured by chemical properties and behaviours that were empirically tested--and in many cases, proven?

 

Don't see why. ;D I like the idea of going to heaven much better than dissipating and turning into blank matter.

And the Noah's Ark thing did happen, that's been proven. Whether it WAS Noah or his Ark can't be proven. It's all speculation.

But it happened. ;D

Little add-on: mind you, I imagine we'll never be able to find out if everyone really did die in the flood. Coulda been a tad exaggerated. ;D

Another add-on to answer last poster's add-on: "Proven" is a word that means a majority of scientists decided that was the best possible explanation. Just because a few chemicals match up or they THINK they know how to date back millions/billions of years, doesn't mean it is fact. It's still speculation. In science, you can never prove anything. Only disprove.

 

The religious standpoint has completely no integrity to argue 'facts'.

Wrong. Flawed insinuation. You can't prove things that have to do with the mechanics of chemical reactions on an atomic level or the mechanics of the atom itself. Applied science, on the other hand (such as what causes Cytolysis to occur) is very provable. You can do it under a microscope.

And yes, I believe I did type it as "Big Bang Theory". When did I say it was fact?

 

Religion can't be science!

Science is either accepted or rejected based on observations and other kinds of tests.

Religion is a belief, there is no science in it whatsoever!

 

I agree wholeheartedly with what you just said.

Just tell that to RoxasNoxas, who claims the Bible is more scientific and makes much more sense.

That's where it gets iffy. While I don't shun 'faith', 'faith' lacks logic. When people throw around the term "makes more sense", logic is an integral part of this statement. So to say "The Bible makes more sense than Science"; I have to disagree.

 

...

 

...

 

...

 

I accept evolution for the reasons of:
1. It has years of proof behind it, and although it has its illogical parts, I have more trust in it then religion.
2. Religion can not be proven, end of story, that is something that a person believes and accepts which personally I find very hard comprehend.

It just seems so odd for me to put myself in the idea that something bigger created everything when I do have a sense of truth in front of me. Or for all I know they are interconnected some how.

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=uIwiPsgRrOs

gg =)