[Rachel Bronwyn]

Originally Posted by Guado

Useless to science how? I was under the impression that science's ultimate goal was to discover how things work/origins/basic pursuit of understanding.

Yes, via the scientific method. If it doesn't follow the scientific method it isn't science. Creationism is unscientific because it insists a scientific theory can be based on the assumption supernatural beings with the ability to create life exist. Supernatural and science can't play together. One is verifiable and, therefore, scientific. The other isn't.

If it turns out that creationism is the truth then it's VERY valuable to the ultimate goal of science.

Being that there is no evidence for the sky fairy creationism is based on or the idea any lifeform is too complex to evolve or the notion life can't occur without the aid of magick, creationism is not a scientific pursuit. It's a religious one. Should creationism prove true it will be via supernatural means, not scientific ones, as the idea of a creator is innately unverifiable and, therefore, no scientific theory can ever spring forth from it.

Provide verifiable evidence beings with the ability to create life exist and creationism will have the potential to be scientific.

I mean honestly I r dum creationist remember? Why must I spell everything out for you?

Stupid is the word we're using to describe you here, actually. I'll add intentionally obtuse and scared.

A little critical thinking will do you some good.

I nearly peed myself when I read that. Someone whose superstition outweighs their value of science preaching critical thinking. Serious lulz.

I think your problem is that you are under the impression that religion and science are mutually exclusive. I assure you that's not the case. Something that's supposed to be about the pursuit of understanding, you are treating as dogma.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Science is about the pursuit of understanding via the scientific process. Religion is about the pursuit of understanding via woowoo. Science is verifiable. Religion is not. That's why it's called faith; you have to be faithful to believe it because you'll never get verifiable proof your religion is right. Not in this life, at least.

Unless religion discards the bits that contradict concrete truths it will become irrelevant. It's called progress.

You essentially are making science a religion.

No. You, sir, are imposing your religion on science. How many times must we say SUPERSTITIOUS IDEAS (which are, by definition, unverifiable) ARE NOT SCIENTIFIC. No where in science can superstition occur. If it isn't verifiable, nothing scientific can come of it. All scientific ideas are based on verifiable truths. Gawd isn't a verifiable truth.

Science is not the pursuit of understanding. It's the pursuit of understanding by verifiable means. Were the existence of a being with the ability to create life verifiable, creationism would have the potential of being scientific.

Unfortunately, there would still be no evidence in it's favour and one-hundred and fifty years of evidence for evolution. Even if creationism were based on something more than an assumption, evolution would still trump it.

Why are you so scared to understand what we do know about the world around us? Why is your faith so engrained that it can't transform to accomodate what we do know about this crazy, complex, fascinating, deadly, beautiful world?

Originally Posted by darththeo

How come in every topic about Evolution someone mentions the Big Bang ... honestly, it is quite annoying. I had to explain to people that the Big Bang Theory is outdated and very few scientists believe that a "singularity exploding" was the cause of the universe anymore.

What's annoying is people think the Big Bang and evolution have something to do with one another. They don't. Evolution answers how all lifeforms came to their current state. It has nothing to do with the creation of the universe nor is it responsible for answering that question.