Creationism (or religion's love/hate relationship with science) (Abiogenesis, soul)

[Faint]

Enlighten me. Why is it that those who don't believe in evolution place so much value and acceptance of so many other things that science has given us?

These (mostly religious) folk trust science in so many aspects of their lives. They start their cars with faith that the gas tank won't explode even though most don't comprehend mechanics and engineering (not to mention physics). They let their pictures be taken without fear that the camera will steal their soul (althought they won't be able to tell you specifically how film or digital sensors catch light). They turn on the light switch and accept electricity as non-supernatural without really understanding the complexities of a power plant.

And there are thousands of other little things we do daily, scientific discoveries and gifts that we just accept as "the way it is" without wondering why.

So now I'm wondering if they can trust and accept so many other fruits of science, why should they think of evolution as being any different?

[Willamena]

Sounds like a wee bit of a strawman, Faint.


But the final question is a good one if we generalize it a bit: So now I'm wondering if [these people] can trust and accept so many other fruits of science, why should they think of evolution as being any different?

In talking with learned Creationists, as opposed to those who simply voice rhetoric, it's been my experience (and this may or may not be typical) that their main objection with the Theory of Evolution is in what it doesn't do for us: the technicalities, like the idea of the original evolutionary event --abiogenesis, or something similar, which while not really a part of the ToE, is certainly implied in it. (If every creature evolved from some prior life-form, and if we don't assume an unending chain, then there must have been a first life-form that evolved from non-life... and how could that be?) These technicalities are holes that have yet to be filled. Lacking anything better to fill the holes, they fall back on what they consider to be the "best" explanation, as unscientific as it is (God did it). Until there is a good reason to change, they see no need to change.

But I think the people you refer to above probably are just stubbornly objecting.

[Faint]

Originally Posted by Willamena

Sounds like a wee bit of a strawman, Faint.


But the final question is a good one if we generalize it a bit: So now I'm wondering if [these people] can trust and accept so many other fruits of science, why should they think of evolution as being any different?

In talking with learned Creationists, as opposed to those who simply voice rhetoric, it's been my experience (and this may or may not be typical) that their main objection with the Theory of Evolution is in what it doesn't do for us: the technicalities, like the idea of the original evolutionary event --abiogenesis, or something similar, which while not really a part of the ToE, is certainly implied in it. (If every creature evolved from some prior life-form, and if we don't assume an unending chain, then there must have been a first life-form that evolved from non-life... and how could that be?) These technicalities are holes that have yet to be filled. Lacking anything better to fill the holes, they fall back on what they consider to be the "best" explanation, as unscientific as it is (God did it). Until there is a good reason to change, they see no need to change.

But I think the people you refer to above probably are just stubbornly objecting.

Maybe, but I would say that most of them aren't learned enough to know what the gaps are...they just assume that some god must fill those gaps.

[MidnightBlue]

Originally Posted by Willamena

(If every creature evolved from some prior life-form, and if we don't assume an unending chain, then there must have been a first life-form that evolved from non-life... and how could that be?)

Is God a life-form? Where did he come from? Even if we grant that God exists outside of time and has no origin in time, we can still question how it is that he exists. How could the existence of an eternal, omniscient and omnipotent being be easier to explain than abiogenesis? If God exists, he must be infinitely more complex than a single-celled organism.

Originally Posted by Willamena

But I think the people you refer to above probably are just stubbornly objecting.

Yup.

[Willamena]

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

Is God a life-form? Where did he come from? Even if we grant that God exists outside of time and has no origin in time, we can still question how it is that he exists. How could the existence of an eternal, omniscient and omnipotent being be easier to explain than abiogenesis? If God exists, he must be infinitely more complex than a single-celled organism.

I don't know anyone who thinks God is a life-form, but I'm sure they're out there.

Nothing in the world is easier than the explanation that need not explain anything (the supernatural).

[Ryan2065]

Originally Posted by Faint

So now I'm wondering if they can trust and accept so many other fruits of science, why should they think of evolution as being any different?

Because science is sometimes wrong, and in their eyes, God is always right. I really think its just that simple =)

[MidnightBlue]

Originally Posted by Willamena

I don't know anyone who thinks God is a life-form, but I'm sure they're out there.

It doesn't matter whether God is an organism. If he exists, his existence is much harder to explain than the existence of carbon-based life forms.

[fantôme profane]

Of course many religious people have absolutely no problem with evolution, but for some it conflicts with their faith. It reminds me of a quote, but I can’t remember where I read it or who said it. So if anyone knows where this comes from I would be grateful.

“If the dominant religion in our culture was sun worshipping, nuclear fusion would be an extremely controversial theory.”

I think that describes the situation we find ourselves in with regards to evolution.

[pmerkt]

Thats simple, evolution is just bad science. It takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does Christianity. Even Darwin himself has said that evolution relies heavily on the "simple" cell. He admitted if it were complex there is no basis for his theory (notice it is a theory, not a fact).

Well we now know the "simple" cell is anything but simple. Millions of components zagging around performing jobs all in one cell. The cell is more complex than anything man has ever made or dreamed of ever making.

Also where are the inbetween forms of man/animal? We have fossils that are "millions " of years old according to scientists, don't you think there would be at least one found?

What is your biggest reason for believing in this theory? I would love to hear what makes you so sure about it.

[jewscout]

Originally Posted by Faint

Enlighten me. Why is it that those who don't believe in evolution place so much value and acceptance of so many other things that science has given us?

These (mostly religious) folk trust science in so many aspects of their lives. They start their cars with faith that the gas tank won't explode even though most don't comprehend mechanics and engineering (not to mention physics). They let their pictures be taken without fear that the camera will steal their soul (althought they won't be able to tell you specifically how film or digital sensors catch light). They turn on the light switch and accept electricity as non-supernatural without really understanding the complexities of a power plant.

And there are thousands of other little things we do daily, scientific discoveries and gifts that we just accept as "the way it is" without wondering why.

So now I'm wondering if they can trust and accept so many other fruits of science, why should they think of evolution as being any different?

there's a difference between using the tools of technological advancements and believing and supporting a scientific theory that underminds literalist interpretation of creation and faith especially when you've been raised or come to believe that anything that deviates from such an interpretation is evil or "of the devil"