Creationism vs. Evolution

[New Clearland]

So what do you think about the origin of life? Was it the result of a series of random mutations? Were we created? Or was it a series of mutations with divine guidance? Lots of arguments are made for all sides of the debate.

Personally, I believe in evolution (fossils anyone?) but I also believe that it was likely guided (not sure by what). Therefore I guess my belief falls more into the intelligent design category. Just a single cell alone is far more complex than any super computer and I doubt that something so complex came about by pure chance.

What do you think and why?

[Valgora]

Evolution.

In my opinion, what it says in the bible is completely wrong.

Even though I (more or less) believe in a god, I don't think it was guided.

[Ifreann]

Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I'm pretty open to intelligent design nowadays.

Though evolution doesn't have much to do with the actual origin of life, I think that's abiogenesis or however it's spelled.

[Ifreann]

I'm pretty open to intelligent design nowadays.

Gods preserve us.

[Volkmacht]

Evolution.

I was never a religious person to begin with and I don't care what religious nuts say (Some say the seven days is merely a metaphor). The universe did not create itself in a week.

[The of Japan]

Oh god not this again!

[Neanderthaland]

The Neanderthal God made us in his image.

[Iceland-Greenland Union]

The Neanderthal God made us in his image.

It was obviously the Homo Erectus god, Neanderthal heathen.

[New Clearland]

I'm pretty open to intelligent design nowadays.

Gods preserve us.

What I like about ID is that it is pretty open. It doesn't necessarily deny evolution nor does it say that the origin of life or evolution for that matter had divine influence. Some proponents of ID actually argue that extraterrestrials may have played a role in human evolution.

[Washington Resistance Army]

The Neanderthal God made us in his image.

Then the human gods created a better image and you went extinct, GG no re.

Gods preserve us.

What I like about ID is that it is pretty open. It doesn't necessarily deny evolution nor does it say that the origin of life or evolution for that matter had divine influence. Some proponents of ID actually argue that extraterrestrials may have played a role in human evolution.

[Neanderthaland]

Gods preserve us.

What I like about ID is that it is pretty open. It doesn't necessarily deny evolution nor does it say that the origin of life or evolution for that matter had divine influence. Some proponents of ID actually argue that extraterrestrials may have played a role in human evolution.

You are correct that ID is not a clear or coherent proposal.

[Ifreann]

Gods preserve us.

What I like about ID is that it is pretty open. It doesn't necessarily deny evolution nor does it say that the origin of life or evolution for that matter had divine influence. Some proponents of ID actually argue that extraterrestrials may have played a role in human evolution.

What I liked about intelligent design was that it had no evidence whatsoever, only misunderstandings and nonsense building on each other, thus leading to great entertainment when people argued it. That got boring after a few years, though.

[Romanum Dominium]

I lean more towards the Intelligent Design side of things, in that I definitely think that God that guided evolution. However, ID is more of a religious thought and has no place in a classroom or being taught as science.

[Cetacea]

Evolution.

I was never a religious person to begin with and I don't care what religious nuts say (Some say the seven days is merely a metaphor). The universe did not create itself in a week.

No it created itself in a expansive moment 13.8 billion years ago

[Montchevre]

Oh boy. This "debate" again. I don't have so much time to waste; Darwinian evolution is scientific fact. It is proven beyond reasonable doubt not only based on Darwin and Wallace's original observations, but now as well by genetics and paleontology. That's all. Someone doubting it can either provide real scientific evidence that contradicts it from a peer-reviewed journal or acknowledge the fact that their belief is not based in fact. This is hard modern science vs wishy washy mythology thousands of years old. It's not even a competition.

[Tuthina]

So what do you think about the origin of life?

Abiogenesis sounds about right.

[The Alma Mater]

Gods preserve us.

What I like about ID is that it is pretty open. It doesn't necessarily deny evolution nor does it say that the origin of life or evolution for that matter had divine influence. Some proponents of ID actually argue that extraterrestrials may have played a role in human evolution.

What I like about ID is how its main advocates did not know the research done at their own institutions and were unable to properly use the find&replace function of microsoft word.

[Unempathetic Dictators]

Oh boy. This "debate" again. I don't have so much time to waste; Darwinian evolution is scientific fact. It is proven beyond reasonable doubt not only based on Darwin and Wallace's original observations, but now as well by genetics and paleontology. That's all. Someone doubting it can either provide real scientific evidence that contradicts it from a peer-reviewed journal or acknowledge the fact that their belief is not based in fact. This is hard modern science vs wishy washy mythology thousands of years old. It's not even a competition.

It is said that the simplest protein, when simplified could not form itself within this side of 6 Septillion years

[The Imperium Empires]

Evolution has evidence behind it, thats what makes me believe no know it's real.

[The Alma Mater]

Oh boy. This "debate" again. I don't have so much time to waste; Darwinian evolution is scientific fact. It is proven beyond reasonable doubt not only based on Darwin and Wallace's original observations, but now as well by genetics and paleontology. That's all. Someone doubting it can either provide real scientific evidence that contradicts it from a peer-reviewed journal or acknowledge the fact that their belief is not based in fact. This is hard modern science vs wishy washy mythology thousands of years old. It's not even a competition.

It is said that the simplest protein, when simplified could not form itself within this side of 6 Septillion years

It is also said that all life was caused by the wizzard Rincewind dropping a sandwich while timetravelling.

Things being said means very little

[Pasong Tirad]

Evolution is fact. The religious among us (myself included) just believe that there's a god behind this evolution.

[Neanderthaland]

It is said that the simplest protein, when simplified could not form itself within this side of 6 Septillion years

It is also said that all life was caused by the wizzard Rincewind dropping a sandwich while timetravelling.

Things being said means very little

It is known *nod*

[Cetacea]

Evolution as described in Linnaean Taxonomies is undoubtedly true and observable fact

unfortunately Darwinian Evolution as described in Phylogenetic Clades is not undisputed fact. In particular there is no evidence of all species developing from a single common ancestor nor is there evidence of transitions between different Orders or Families.

In other words Evolution has shown that Cats (Felidae) will evolve into Different types of Cat, there is no evidence that Cats evolved from the same ancestor as Bears and so certainly no evidence of sharing common descent with Blue-green Algae.

[Khalisako]

The world was created by the sky woman and everything else just sorta happened by itselfs, i guess.