Difference between revisions of "Creationism vs. science"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎News: national parks cater to creationism)
Line 30: Line 30:
  
 
===News===
 
===News===
 +
* '''2006-11-28''' [http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=801 How Old Is the Grand Canyon? Park Service Won't Say]: "Orders to Cater to Creationists Makes National Park Agnostic on Geology"
 
* '''2006-02-28''' [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/28/national/28utah.html Anti-Darwin Bill Fails in Utah] ([http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/28/1829225 slashdot])
 
* '''2006-02-28''' [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/28/national/28utah.html Anti-Darwin Bill Fails in Utah] ([http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/28/1829225 slashdot])
 
* '''2006-02-19''' [http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-02/asfb-ada021706.php AAAS denounces anti-evolution laws as hundreds of K-12 teachers convene for 'Front Line' event]
 
* '''2006-02-19''' [http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-02/asfb-ada021706.php AAAS denounces anti-evolution laws as hundreds of K-12 teachers convene for 'Front Line' event]

Revision as of 00:04, 30 December 2006

Overview

This page compares the scientific theory of evolution against the various informal theories which hold that the Earth and all life thereon was created as an explicit act ("direct creation"), typically by a supernatural entity who is most commonly stated to be the Christian God.

Most discussions of evolution vs. direct creation essentially amount to criticisms of evolution, with direct creation (interventionist) theories offered as being much more sensible and reasonable by comparison.

Disputes involving evolution

Notes

Apparently "disagreement over the common ancestry of all life" is an issue as well; to be researched.

Related Pages

Links

Reference

Debate & Editorials

News

Quotes

  • From StarTribune.com interview with Lee Strobel: "Evolution is defined as a random, undirected process. But even scientists say the universe had to begin somewhere. Then you look at genetics, cosmology, physics and other fields. From there we can extrapolate that there had to be an immaterial, powerful, intelligent cause to the universe coming into being. The evidence defies a coincidental explanation. And random, undirected evolution precludes a creator calling the shots, so there's an intellectual disconnect for me. Also, Darwinism offers no explanation for human consciousness. The gaps in science point to a creator."