Creationism and science?

fuzzylunkin1 · Post by **fuzzylunkin1** » Mon May 14, 2012 6:57 pm

Okay, please forgive me if I come off as insulting or rude, but this topic can certainly piss me off sometimes. To be clear, I don't mean to insult anyone's religion. I do, however, mean to insult you if you reject science.

I have a friend who is reasonably smart but absolutely rejects any part of evolution, his reason being "oh, it's unprovable and has extremely spotty evidence." Yet he accepts gravity. He uses his smart phones daily. He writes computer programs and websites, wears vision-correcting lenses, drives a car.

The scientific method is OK for all these things until we get to evolution. Nope, evolution is wrong. He doesn't need to prove it wrong to believe it's wrong, and doesn't need any evidence at all to support creationism. This is absolute stupidity. It completely blows my mind that it's possible to think some of these things.

From my point of view, you absolutely cannot accept science and "faith" at the same time. I feel it's fine to believe in imaginary fairy tails, do whatever you want -- but don't try to say it's factual, and don't say science is wrong if you can't disprove it.

How can someone possibly believe in religion, creationism, etc, and the scientific method at the same time? Just how do people manage to get these sort of thoughts into their heads? This day in age, we are actually capable of finding answers to many questions we have... yet people reject science.

Why, exactly, aren't more people like Richard Feynman?

Malicious Wraith · Post by **Malicious Wraith** » Mon May 14, 2012 7:05 pm

There are plenty of people that believe that their incarnation of "God" set up all of the scientific systems (such as evolution) to fulfill his grand plan. They espouse that they are simply agents within his design.

They can be compatible.

fuzzylunkin1 · Post by **fuzzylunkin1** » Mon May 14, 2012 7:12 pm

Malicious Wraith wrote:QUOTE (Malicious Wraith @ May 14 2012, 02:05 PM) They can be compatible.

I agree. The problem is when they interfere with science.

Malicious Wraith · Post by **Malicious Wraith** » Mon May 14, 2012 7:17 pm

fuzzylunkin1 wrote:QUOTE (fuzzylunkin1 @ May 14 2012, 03:12 PM) I agree. The problem is when they interfere with science.

Well, science and faith aren't mutually exclusive. As I said, its perfectly valid for one to believe (with faith) that God designed all of the scientific systems, and using scientific inquiry is a perfectly valid way to understand God's plan... Then you have those people that take a more dogmatic approach.

I think a good question is: Why does it matter if someone believes in silly things?

Post by **Dome** » Mon May 14, 2012 7:21 pm

Malicious Wraith wrote:QUOTE (Malicious Wraith @ May 14 2012, 12:17 PM) I think a good question is: Why does it matter if someone believes in silly things?

Because these people effect policy.

fuzzylunkin1 · Post by **fuzzylunkin1** » Mon May 14, 2012 7:21 pm

Malicious Wraith wrote:QUOTE (Malicious Wraith @ May 14 2012, 02:17 PM) I think a good question is: Why does it matter if someone believes in silly things?

Well, normally I don't care what people believe. However, in this case it's a close friend of mine. And he likes to try to convince me of his beliefs.

And then there's the topic of scientific literacy overall. Sometimes religion just plain stops progress.

Post by **BackTrak** » Mon May 14, 2012 7:30 pm

You can see the hind legs on most boa constrictors.

Also, request an explination of teacup dogs from anyone who doubts evolutiuon.

Just how did that mini micro labra-dober-poodle come to be anyway?

I think that's why intelligent design has been picking up steam; it's a nice reconcilliation for people of faith, and accepting of science.

I agree with MW: who cares what he thinks, just talk about beer making and computers and see if he wants to play allegiance.

Edit:

Actually Fuzz, if he's trying to convince you, just fight fire with Scientology (or any other faith based source). After a while you'll both get tired of faith based evidence and move on.

tsubaki_sanjuro · Post by **tsubaki_sanjuro** » Mon May 14, 2012 7:34 pm

There is nothing inherently wrong with Intelligent Design - after all, you cannot yet disprove the existence of God / a god / gods - its the stuff it has to lend credence to that makes the theory unworkable.

Malicious Wraith · Post by **Malicious Wraith** » Mon May 14, 2012 7:37 pm

BackTrak wrote:QUOTE (BackTrak @ May 14 2012, 03:30 PM) Just how did that mini micro labra-dober-poodle come to be anyway?

Although I agree with your sensibilities, I think that on this instance, the culprit isn't evolution, but premature birth.

Post by **BackTrak** » Mon May 14, 2012 7:40 pm

Quite right, let's draw the line at the Toy level (4-8lbs) dog. Those little ankle biters have breed lines that can be tracked back with size and weight figures that show decrease over time.