Creation vs. evolution main categories
Posted in the Evolution Debate Forum
Since: Feb 13
#1 Aug 7, 2013
THE TWO SIDES AND INBETWEEN
At the risk of repetition of some information from above, I think this brief overview will be of value.
Evolutionism: a theory and belief that a physical process of branching continuum was involved in the variegation of life forms. Also, that from prior forms all subsequent ones are “descendents”.
Theistic: belief that evolution is an anthropomorphic (human-like) God’s creative procedure.
Other: anything from absolute atheism such as Dawkins (above) to the spirituality of belief in evolution as an aspect of God (whether “guy-in-the-sky” personification or existential systematology.
Creationism: a belief and theory that a supernatural dynamic or
“personified” agency designed and actualized and is
directing, ongoing, all existence.
Evolutionary: as in Theistic evolutionism (above)
Religious: belief that the Bible is informative, from a
minimum of inspiration and “meaning” concerning life
and its formulation ....to significant levels of the
“documentation” of existence ... yet still interfacing
with the secular sciences’ observations and data.
Creation Science (“CreaSci”, you’ll allow me, I hope): belief that
what the Bible states is, essentially, if not exclusively, the
documentation superseding (actually dismissing any
validity of) all otherwise.
Old earth: interpretation of Biblical wording such as
Genesis’s “day” perhaps meaning “era” or “epoch”
New earth: absolute “literal” reading of Genesis thus
the earth and all was made in six days and the total age
since that poofogenic procedure was between 6 and l0,000
Dyscreative nonscience: imaginative, irrational, paranoid, even
psychotic ideation-image linkages propounded as fact and
Flat earthers: yes, even in the 21st c. there are those who
deny that the earth is a sphere!!
Geocentrists: yes, believe it or not, there are those who still do ... believe this ..
Since: Jul 13
Mem Martins, Portugal
#2 Aug 8, 2013
I believe the word "theory" should not be used in the definition of "creationism". If the word "theory" is being used with its scientific meaning, it would be incorrect to use it to describe a belief which is not supported by evidence or experimentation.
#3 Aug 15, 2013
The systematic sequencial arrangement of instructional patterned compounds which direct ALL life on earth came together some how. Humans still yet, do not have the ability to create such a system. If we could examine these compounds closely, we could see something similar to spiraling train tracks with signals running in opposite directions on the opposing rails. These signals transmit all the information that is required to reproduce all manner of living things. Life unfolds following these patterns and repeating cylces within intertwineing systems do the work of producing life. This is very much an intelligent arangement and to deny this is to deny reality. SCPID theory explains some of this.
“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”
Since: May 08
#4 Aug 15, 2013
SCPID "explains" exactly nothing.
#5 Aug 15, 2013
Still don't care Mikey.
#6 Aug 15, 2013
Why sure it can do this thing!
Add your comments below
|Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09)||5 min||Subduction Zone||32,042|
|Is Creationism and Intelligent Design debunked ...||6 min||Dogen||229|
|"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12)||12 min||Subduction Zone||74,877|
|Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of...||20 min||Dogen||4,059|
|Mathematicians PROVED evolution IMPOSSIBLE!||27 min||Dogen||300|
|Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ...||30 min||John||138|
|It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09)||45 min||Subduction Zone||162,001|
Find what you want!
Search Evolution Debate Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC