Difference between revisions of "Creationism vs. science"

Revision as of 00:59, 27 July 2007

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.

Evolution is a process which can be observed, over human-scale timeframes (decades or less) in nature. We are not currently aware of any significant controversy over this.
Disagreement over the origins of life is more of a controversy, as the scientific explanation (which incorporates evolution) contradicts the more literalistic (or legalistic) interpretations of the Bible. Many branches of Christianity (such as the Mormons) find no contradiction on this point, however.
Disagreement over the origins of humankind is probably where the corresponding evolutionary explanation is the most controversial, as it contradicts the Biblical creation story on both the above issue (the origins of life) and the creation of humankind.
There is also much criticism of evolution in general.

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

2006-12-27 Big mistake by Richard Dawkins: "It is important to understand the sheer magnitude of the error that creationists are attributing to their scientific colleagues."
"Intelligent Design" vs. science: a brief but very illuminating metaphor by J Greely, with comments
Intelligent Design: An Ambiguous Assault on Evolution at LiveScience
Creation and Evolution in the Schools by Orson Scott Card (2006-01-12)
The Creation/Evolution Controversy by Don Lindsay
a biased analysis by Woozle
some debate (mostly calm) at Teachnology Teacher Forum

2006-11-28 How Old Is the Grand Canyon? Park Service Won't Say: "Orders to Cater to Creationists Makes National Park Agnostic on Geology"
- An archived version of "Welcome to Grand Canyon National Park" goes so far as to describe the canyon as having been "carved over millennia" (rather than hundreds of millions of years) and "a gift from past generations" (implying that the canyon was somehow created by living creatures from which we are descended, or at least that it wouldn't still be here if not for them... was GC ever in danger of being exploited by developers, perhaps? Can it be proved that humans are actually related to developers?) The Geologic Formations page, however, describes the canyon's history as beginning "about 1,200 million years ago".
2006-02-28 Anti-Darwin Bill Fails in Utah (slashdot)
2006-02-19 AAAS denounces anti-evolution laws as hundreds of K-12 teachers convene for 'Front Line' event
2006-02-12 Churches celebrate Darwin's birthday Nearly 450 Christian churches "say Darwin`s theory of biological evolution is compatible with faith and that Christians have no need to choose between religion and science"

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."
- Some commentary by PZ Myers at Pharyngula

@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 ===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"
+** An [http://www.nps.gov/archive/grca/grandcanyon/ archived version of "Welcome to Grand Canyon National Park"] goes so far as to describe the canyon as having been "carved over millennia" (rather than hundreds of millions of years) and "a gift from past generations" (implying that the canyon was somehow created by living creatures from which we are descended, or at least that it wouldn't still be here if not for them... was GC ever in danger of being exploited by developers, perhaps? Can it be proved that humans are actually related to developers?) The [http://www.nps.gov/grca/naturescience/geologicformations.htm Geologic Formations] page, however, describes the canyon's history as beginning "about 1,200 million years ago".
 * '''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]