Where do Creationists think the Theory of Evolution comes from?

Creationism comes from religious beliefs. The Theory of Evolution stems from science.If Creationism is true, why would scientists bother to work towards refining and publicising the ToE? Do Creationists believe that the ToE is the result of scientists wishing to further science, some rogue scientists trying to get attention, or the work of Satan trying to steer us away from the teachings of the Bible (or some other reason)?I'm not entirely sure where this should go, but I was thinking Faith and Belief. {Changed "Creations" to "Creationists" in topic title - Adminnemooseus]This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 11-11-2005 12:30 PM

Thanks for that! Nice to hear some well researched and consise points.It still doesn't really get to the heart of the matter as to where Creationsists think the ToE comes from. Why do Creationists have a problem with experimental evidense?The Strauss arguement is deeply thought provoking yet rather worrying, as I believe it was extended to convince the masses that there is/was an enemy to fight (communism, now "terrorists") who are out there to kill you, so don't question your government who are trying to protect you. Hence the war in Iraq. They did have weapons of mass destruction, oh yes.I do hope people will challenge the following issue it raises: If you are intelligent and can cope with the concept of a purposeless life, you are capable of learning all worldly truths. If not, you can wallow in the ignorance of religion and keep out of the intellectuals way until you die.

Well, this has certainly become a faith question. The problem I have with faith is that you "just have to believe things" without any real evidence. It relies on a lot of assumptions, ie believing that the Bible is a literal text. Please remember that quoting the Bible is not scientific evidence. edit-sorry for being a bit rude.It still doesn't get to the heart of the topic. Are you saying that people publicise the ToE because they are evil and are trying to be better than God?This message has been edited by Whirlwind, 15-11-2005 05:33 PM

Firstly, sorry for my rather rude statement earlier.I've got a few broad points that I'd like to bring up.

1. Please don't get science and religion confused. The ToE is not a religion, it is a scientific theory. You can chose to believe all of it, parts of it, or none of it as you see fit.
2. Remember that scientists don't have all the answers (or they say they do to sell books, like Richard Dawkins). Research in all areas of science is constantly going on, theories are always being rewritten and always discussed.
3. I'm a bit confused about the definition of the word "vegetative" in this sense.
   

I'd still like to know from as many Creationsits as possible where they think the ToE comes from. It sounds as if Philip believes that publicisers of the ToE are evil. Does that mean the ToE itself is evil? If so, are the humans involved swayed by the devil or have they just strayed?I personally believe that the ToE came about and is still around today because it is the best explanation of all the species in the world from the scientific evidence we have. I see no other reasons for its emergence, because it doesn't do anyone any favours (its not nice to think that humans have no purpose). I do not think that it is intrinsically evil.P.S. Why *all* the *stars*?This message has been edited by Whirlwind, 15-11-2005 05:54 PM

Sorry, but if something as unprovable as the "revelation of the true God" is not a religious belief, I don't know what is! Where is your proof of this? The Bible? That isn't strictly true. There is a branch is science called phylogeny which very much focusses on now. It's quite a hard science to describe but in essence it compares sequences of proteins conserved throughout species. From these comparisons you can draw evolutionary trees.I'd put a link to it here but I haven't found a good one. Google phylogeny should get you somewhere.This message has been edited by Whirlwind, 21-11-2005 05:37 PM

This is a bit off topic, but for the record I think you need to realise the differences between science and religion. How can you say that science is a "worthless pursuit"? You don't need to look far to see the benefits of science (you are using a computer aren't you?).Also, you can't disagree with science just because you don't like what you hear. This is a philosophical debate, but its fairly self evident that truth is not always beautiful.

Er, getting quite a bit off topic here! I still haven't had that many views on where Creationists believe the ToE comes from. I'm all for scientific debate, but I do think the one here is guided by the wrong motives. Truly unbiased science should be in the interests of science, not religion.This message has been edited by Whirlwind, 22-11-2005 12:26 PM

I know this is off topic, but I like this debate! That is a "belief". What has that perspective got to do with science? All aspects of life must be dealt with by the fallible human mind. How can we know the true word of God when all our senses are fallible? For example, when you read the Bible, your fallible human eyes might not read the words correctly. Your fallible brain might not interperet the words as God intended. The fallibility of the translator might mean that the meaning of God's words are lost when translated into your language etc. I don't see how you can say the word of God is perfect, when by your logic no-one knows what the word of God is!Science does realise that humans are fallible and can make mistakes, hence debate.edit - Oops! Misread "works" as "words". Arguement is essentially the same though.This message has been edited by Whirlwind, 22-11-2005 01:39 PM

Hi Yaro!I've been trying to get some ideas from creationists about their opinions on where the ToE comes from, and why it exists. Most replies have been way off topic, but I did have one reply saying that the ToE is the work of Satan!I suppose I'm just trying to put a new angle on the whole topic. Basically, before Darwin the only explanation of where we all came from was religous texts. If everyone was happy with these stories and accepted them to be true, why would a contradicting scientific theory prove to be so popular?I gave a few possible theories which ranged from the sensible to the extreme. Like I say, so far I've had one straight answer which I would put in the extreme category!I don't think creationists like to consider the origins of the ToE, becuase they start to realise how weak the creationist arguement is (personal opinion!).