quote:
If evolution is wrong, is Creation correct?
No. They are two separate explanations for how we all came
to share this strange little mud-ball. One says nothing about
the other.
In fact it would be possible for both to be correct. Some god
or other poofed the universe into being, dumped a few dozen
microbes on a planet or two, and then let his/her/its universal
rules run riot -- with evolution (as we understand it in a
biological sense) operating to diversify the extant critters.
What the theory of evolution (biological) does do, is to cast
doubt on a literal interpretation of the Genesis account of
creation.
quote:
Evolution is divided into six groups...
What we are largely concerned with here is the Theory of Evolution
first put forward by Charles Darwin, and elaborated/ammended over
the intervening years. This theory attempts to explain the
diversity of life we observe around us.
quote:
6.Micro-evolution. Variation within kind. i.e. A wolf to a coyote to a poodle...still dogs. This one has been observed and happens all the time.
I actually wouldn't call that evolution, rather, variation
Allowing tha you might be using the term 'kind' very loosely
(rather than have a specific concept of what that means), variation
within a kind is caused by micro-evolution (I don't like the
micro macro distinction in any case) they are not synonymous.
quote:
I believe that it is logically and scientifically possible to prove that God exists.
You stated that for something to be scientifically acceptable
it must be 'observable, testable, or demonstratable' ...
please apply any one of those to a proof of God (I assume you mean
the christian god ... but any god will do).
quote:
Evolution is just as much a religion as creation
Except that no-one I know accepts the theory of evolution as
correct simply because that's what they have been told.
One must not confuse the loose, colloquial usage of the word
'beleive' with the religous connotation.
People who accept evolution as the best current explanation for
the extant diversity of life do so because they find the evidence
compelling.
quote:
But I just don't want our tax dollars being used to teach only one of these religions in our public schools
I thought you weren't allowed to teach any religions in US schools
(I assume you are from the US please say so if you are not).
Evolution is not, in any case, religous in nature.
You may have been force fed lines of argument that seem to suggest
that, but you'll likely find people here who have refuted those
lines often .... ad nauseum even.
Evolution is observable, testable and demonstrable -- as
someone pointed out with an experimental description.
It is supported by multiple lines of corrobaratory (is that
a word?) evidence from different fields of study.
The weight of evidence for stacks pretty high -- the evidence
against is sparse (and that's being kind). Some of the details
might be wrong, but the framework fits what we can observe.
™ Version 4.2