quote:
Originally posted by Dramnek_Ulk:
heres a little but i can get much more if you want it... they come from here
Creationism is not scientifically explanatory.
Science and religion are two different cognitive fields between which communication is not possible.
In all honestry I didn't read any more of this post than this line. I'm not arguing anything on a religious viewpoint in this thread. I'm in total scientist mode and stating the obvious fact that many people are 1. misenterpreting what science has discovered so far, and 2. Believing in speculations to such an extent that it's become much like a religion to them (the best way I could phrase it)
From a scientific viewpoint, common descent and random creation of life are hypothesis at best and are not proven. There are some predictions involving them, but you know, speculation is a nice synonym for prediction. Scientific method is based on proof, through and through. and there is none in relation to these ideas. There is only prediction. As such, I refuse to accept them until the proof is found. I will, quite logically, follow the belief that is hundreds of times older and has more credibility. When this new idea has been proven, then I will consider acepting it as a valid replacement. But it will never be proven, and anyone who claims such a strong belief in it with no proof should proclaim they have a religion based on faith in scientific speculation. Science, or evolution, must be their God.