Difference between revisions of "Creationism vs. science"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Related Pages)
m (Reverted edits by (Talk); changed back to last version by Woozle)
Line 13: Line 13:
==Related Pages==
==Related Pages==
* [[Evolution vs. direct creation]] is an example of [[religion vs. science]].
* [[Evolution vs. direct creation]] is an example of [[religion vs. science]].
you are all gay!!!

Revision as of 03:32, 17 December 2007


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

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

Disputes involving evolution


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

Related Pages



Debate & Editorials



  • 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."