minnemooseus asks of me:
quote:
Might I ask Stevo3890, Rrhain, and TechnoCore - What is your position in the evolution vs. creationism debate?
I think that the general consensus among biologists and others who have spent the greatest amount of effort in the field of biology is that life diversified via evolutionary processes. There is still a lot of work to be done and many questions remained unanswered, but Dobzhansky's comment seems to sum it up:
Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Someday, there may be something that throws it all away, but nothing seems to be on the horizon. So, we go with what we have and everything that we have says evolution.
Now, is it possible that god is involved? Of course. Evolution is a process of mutation and selection and there is nothing that says such events cannot be influenced by conscious action. Take a look at human breeding programs. Who is to say that god doesn't have a subtler method of accomplishing the same thing?
Of course, I'm not saying in the above that I believe in god (nor am I saying that I don't). I'm simply pointing out that evolution does not preclude god.
Too, evolution is about the diversification of life, not its origins nor the origin of the universe. Evolution is compatible with every method of genesis. It doesn't matter if life came into being chemically through abiogenesis, supernaturally through god zap-poofing it into existence, extraterrestrially through panspermia or alien seeding, interdimensionally through a rift in space-time, or any other method you could possibly imagine. So long as life does not reproduce perfectly from generation to generation, then evolution is satisfied.
Good enough?
------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!
™ Version 4.2