Why is it Evolution versus Creation?

Unfortunately some religious folk (not just Christians) believe that their deity has told them how the world works so scientists must be wrong. Actually, evolution has shown that we are no higher than anything else. If anything fundamentalists are upset that evolution has shown that rather than the other way around. Their discoveries are documented - you can verify them at your leisure (and expense, unfortunately). It's not a matter of trying to convince people that their deity is wrong. It is a matter of trying to show people that the science is not fuelled by ulterior motives and that ID should not be taught in schools. Nobody is arguing if evolution occurred. That is what is referred to as the historical fact of evolution. Evolutionists are trying to show people that there is significant evidence for this if only they would put their religious beliefs to one side they'd see it. The 'why' is explained by the Theory of Evolution.

Nothing of the sort. Creation makes empirical claims about how the world works. Science can show those claims to be wrong. Creationism could be wrong, it could be right. After all, an all powerful deity could have made the earth seem old to scientists, right? ID is possible. And I agree. I believe the best way to decide which one is more likely to be an accurate description of the universe we live in is to investigate the positive evidence for each position. That's what we do here. Thousands of people may have witnessed his miracles - but unfortunately they don't exist now, and they didn't write it down. We have no documentary evidence that is contemporary with Jesus that is relevant, except possibly some Roman records. Not at all. I do believe that the interpretation that is employed by Young Earth Creationists is falsified by the evidence. I can't speak for what God meant in the Bible, nor what his chosen agents meant. I can happily speak about what a significant amount of his believers believe today. Including the belief that the earth is 6,000 years old or so. That depends what you mean by 'more than likely', and 'the grand scheme of things' and 'science' and 'wrong'.I agree that, if history has anything to say about scientific conclusions it is that they are likely to be incomplete right now. Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

That was Simon Greenleaf, according to every google search I tried.

---

Also: Please don't spam the board with replies to yourself as additions to your previous post. Simply edit the post you wish to add somethng to.