Earth: Created or Accident?

[†The Blood Countess†]

I had this little debate in my mind and I was curious as to what others had to say. Many know what my opinion is. I believe the earth was created by a deity (I'm sure ya'll know which one I'm referring to) and didn't happen by chance. Too many things just don't make sense in my own mind if this were to just...happen. You know what I mean?

So...I'm a creationist.

What do you guys think? And please, let's be civil about this? The last one I started ended up with me being bashed left and right >>; (this was elsewhere)

[Lady Thorn]

I vote for by chance, though that's not strictly my view. Like the quote says: "Science: it works, b*tches!".

I am, to the deepest core of my being, an ardent atheist. Therefore, it is quite easy to see where my thoughts lie. The Big Bang, for one. As for things being too right for it to be chance... well, it only seems that way because it's what is. Sure it's wonderful, but it's wonderful because we have adapted to be perfectly suited to the conditions it provides. When there was carbon dioxide abundant, there were plants. When oxygen, oxygen-breathers. It only seems perfect because, well, we're perfect for it.

If you were to read "The Science of Discworld 3" (yes, it's half fiction, but the other half is solid evolution science), it would give some lovely arguments about the watch-maker theory. I don't know if your views stretch to evolution being wrong, or simply that the earth itself was created, and science took over afterwards, but it's an interesting theory to read. It's an argument against intelligent design, simply based on observational evidence and such.

Case in point: the dinosaurs. We can carbon date (woo! Science!) their bones to prove their existence prior to 6000 years ago. We can date human remains into the millions of years. Of course, I'm aware of the theory that the fossils are a joke that palaeontologists have yet to grasp, but it's a bit tenuous.

Then you've got rocks. Rocks can be dated into millions of years again. We have huge, enormous geological time-lines stretching back into the beyond. If god did it, he works in even more mysterious ways than I think anyone expected.

[†The Blood Countess†]

Wow Lady Thorn. Well thought out reply. Had to say that ^^;

Er. Dang. I don't know where to start on defending my side so is there something you (or anyone else) want to hear about?

I do have one thing I will say and that is "The Big Bang Theory" has been proven wrong but it's still used since no one else can come up with a reason for the universe coming into existence.

There is a theory I believe dubbed the Momentum Theory (or something like that). If there was an explosion that started it all, why isn't everything moving in the same direction at the same speed? I read something about this, even heard a creationist speak about it, but most of the facts escape my head right now, I should look it up when I find the chance >>; but I hope what I presented makes sense.

[Lady Thorn]

^^ woo for me!

Right, I don't know much about this, so if it makes no sense, it's because I'm doing it wrong.
But anyway.

There is a theorised particle known as the "Higgs' Boson" or "God Particle" that has something to do with the idea of the Big Bang. I'm not a physicist in any way (universe physics gives me the creeps anyway) but I'm pretty sure the idea goes along the lines of matter from energy and blethers like that. I think it's what they were looking for in CERN when they didn't suck the Earth into a black hole.
But I digress. The universe is still moving. Bohr shift shows that we are all moving outwards from the centre of the universe, even today. It's all moving outwards, so this somehow slows the speed (citation needed... gods I don't know) and... ok, I give up. I'll find a physicist and ask them tomorrow.

Point is, science is so easy to prove wrong. It's what scientists do. What most people fail to see, is that scientists enjoy proving that they know nothing, and like to spend the next fifty years building new theories to be destroyed by peer review. And they know they can never be certain (because they're all pedants and geeks) and so will never say "this is definitely right" because they know it won't be. So science may work, but it's damn hard to prove (unlike maths, which is ultimate proof).

But religion and creationism claims ultimate truth and knowledge. But it won't stand up to questioning. This is actually pretty much the root of my lack of faith. I need to question, and in questioning religion, I always come down to a fundamental point that is somehow irrational. It may take a while, but it's always there. Science, while never claiming ultimate knowledge (which is why everything is still a theory) at least can stand up to questioning. We can ask.

But back to creation.

Do you believe in Adam and Eve? You know, the full Garden of Eden and original sin bejazz? I don't know you're denomination of Christianity, so can't make a reasonable guess, but I'd be interested to know to what extent you take the word of the Bible as ultimate truth.

Thus ends my rambling. It is incoherent, but I have spent too long today doing Latin and NaNoWriMo.

[†The Blood Countess†]

Yeah you have a point about scientists enjoying proving things wrong and find another theory to test and see if it's correct *laughs*. It makes sense but wowzers. Dunno how to reply to that D8

And to answer your question, yes, I believe in the Garden of Eden with Adam and Eve nom noming an apple and walla....sin enters world and such n' such. In fact, I just remembered. I have a book about creationism and evolution so I can probably look up information in there for whatever is thrown my way......next. >>;;;

Ahem so yah XD

[sbs]

Me and my dad had this conversation one night and he brought up this point in which I agree with. The whole theory of everything being created or just happening kind of plays hand in hand. He used alot of stuff from the bible and crap but I'll spare those details but from he told me they also play hand in hand with one another. If you really ask me? who gives a flying F**k? we're here in the now and present, we don't know exactly what events happened to make it that way so I have to cast my vote for the Unsure portion of the poll.

[Lady Thorn]

But how can you not want to know? I mean, we're here for seventy years, ish. When we die, that's it, game over, the big black pit of oblivion wipes us out forever. Surely, while you're here, you want to know how you came to get here? I am happy, when given the evidence, to agree that the current theories on the formation of the Earth could well be true. I am not, however, ever going to believe that a big beardy man in the sky made it in six days then used the seventh to have a nap. This... it just doesn't hold up to logic, sense or reason. And so I shall continue to question and to want to know until I reach a conclusion that does.

[sbs]

[qoute]But how can you not want to know? I mean, we're here for seventy years, ish. When we die, that's it, game over, the big black pit of oblivion wipes us out forever.[/qoute]

Unfortunatley we don't know what'll actually await for us untill we die. But that's means for another debat, My stand point is this...

Many people over look that Science is better than religion becuase it explains more. In actuality there are alot of wholes and things in science just as there are in religion, however if you coinside the two together like the first scientist of the reniesance era did, you will see alot of things actually form together. See, what most people doesn't understand is that Science, though wonderful and logical, was originally used to better explain religion's stories of creation for all those dee dee dee's out there lol. And I look at the idealism of creation vs it just happening as this:

When i die, if something really is there at the end then I'll ask it what really happened, if not? oh well.

[Lady Thorn]

Yes, science has holes. But science admits this fact and moves on. The whole drive of science is to fill the holes, and to gain the knowledge we don't have by logical methodology. Religion requires belief, whereas science only asks that you open your eyes and use your brain. It offers you what it knows, and asks that you make a reasoned and informed decision based on the evidence it presents. If you don't like it, you can use the evidence to make your own theory. As long as you can prove it, with evidence, it's fine. This is my issue with religion. It requires blind faith. It requires suspension of disbelief. It can get away with anything because it has to prove nothing. Therefore, I stick with science, because at least science lets me see why it says what it says, in this case and in many others.

[†The Blood Countess†]

Well...Lady Thorn? Evolution IS a religion. Believing that a whale evolved into a land animal (those "useless" bones in the pelvis is actually used to support the mating organs because...well...whales are big...yeah...MOVING ON!) takes a TON of faith. I'm sure you think the same way with my religion. Come on, a deity creating all of this? Bah.

So yeah...._.; we all have our beliefs and such.

[Lady Thorn]

No. Evolution is not a religion. I do not give it my blind faith. There is a subtle difference. A religion offers an idea in which one must believe, offering no proof. Science offers proof and allows you to decide if you accept its theories or not. I do accept them, based on the evidence I have seen and heard and been given, and so it is not a question of faith and belief. I don't think I believe anything. To believe is to give in to ignorance and to accept a lack of knowledge in the hope that what you trust is right. I hate this, as an idea. It asks that you not use your brain.