First of all, congrats! You found the forums-- a feat not commonly performed by most
Well let's see here:
This,, this, and this are all recent religion vs. no religion threads, so I suggest going to those before making your own.
So yes, finding different threads in this forum is a good way to not mistakenly create excess topics that are the same thing. Have fun in the AG community!
Unfortunatly science doesn't deal with common sense, it deals with facts. Common sense is subjective while science is, designed to be at least, objective; meaning that it's not a valid argument for intelligent design .
Intelligent Design isn't religious, it's just common sense.
. . . how? Science functions just fine without intelligent design.
Also, note that this is not a sensible debate - intelligent design has to do with the creation of life, whereas all evolution is is a theory and a fact(long story) of how life changes over time. It's more of a debate on abiogenesis vs. ID.
O_O Welcome to AG... yeah this topic has been very popular recently...or more accurately stuff revolving around the subject of creation. Takes Freakenstein's advice and heed samy's warning my friend.
Well as God has absolute control over the factors that would ave affected Natural selection and thus evolution it can be debated.
Yeah, that's part of it, but it's comparing the gist of evolution with a footnote in intelligent design. They're not directly comparable, at least if you want to be accurate.
Sorry. If God exists than my statement is true, that's what I was debating.
Then how long, were is your proof that even the way you view the myth is true?
We have other forums for this...
Yeah, that's part of it, but it's comparing the gist of evolution with a footnote in intelligent design. They're not directly comparable, at least if you want to be accurate.
I think he means by the fact they are comparing two different things, ID is a "Theory" that someone created the earth while evolution is a theory on how things got to be the way they are, how they were, and how they will be.
I say they can be comparable, as if the ID theory was correct then evolution would be incorrect, as most state that it created everything as it is now.
I think he means by the fact they are comparing two different things, ID is a "Theory" that someone created the earth while evolution is a theory on how things got to be the way they are, how they were, and how they will be.
I see.
ID kinda got screwed over because no one wants to risk money funding studies or peer reviewed journals because it would leave you dead to the scientific community.
