Re: I'd like a better understanding of the debate


diegopig@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hello.
My name is Diego...

Good beginning, my name is Gordon. Here is my view.

...and I became interested in the Creation/ID/Evolution
debate some time ago.

First, it's not a debate, it's a disagreement. Consideer these
"facts":

Creationists-creation scientists-intelligent designers, "creationists",
believe a transcendent causative source (usually called God) created
the universe and earth and life. They also believe (mainly) that God
created all life from scratch, every species one by one. I say
"mainly" because there is some evidence that IDers are beginning to
accept microevloution as a valid possibility. (Someone more informed
than I will have to enlighten you on this).

People who accept the evolution as a valid scientific theory,
"evolutionists", see speciation as a natural process with each new life
form coming into being from existing life forms. The theory of
evolution takes no position on the origin of life.

I see the main conflicts as these:

Many (most? all? beats me!) creationists think the theory of evolution
includes an origin of life position.

Many "creationists" believe evolution is anti-God, when it is not.
Many prominent scientists are theists, but none to my knowledge are
"creationists". (This statement may bring some flak, but it is one
truth I see. I have yet to meet a true scientist who subscribes to
creationism. Why? because to do so means disavowing certain
scientific evidence. That is an intellectual fraud and not
scientific.)

Since I live in Italy, it's difficult for me to understand exactly what
this is all about.

I did not realize Italy was so isolated. check with the Vatican which
has no problem with either and see the "debate so called" a fraud.

So I'd be very grateful if somebody could give me a better
understanding of the debate.

It's not a debate.

For example, from my readings it seems that creationism (or ID
advocates) feel
that Darwin's teory of evolution is a threat to their faith.

Mistakenly so.

Can somebody explain this to me? In what way is a threath? If it's not
a threat,
what are the reasons of this opposition to Darwin's ToE? Did I get it
completly wrong?

They see it as a threat because they don't understand it.

Thank you everybody.
Diego Pigozzo

You're welcome, I think. GH

NOTE:
I'm not posting here to neither change anybody's mind nor to have fun
of somebody.
I have a real interest in understanding the feelings of the people
involved.

Nice touch.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Darwins Kool-Aid
    ... Enter Richard Dawkins. ... intelligent being may have created life on earth. ... product of "Darwinian evolution." ... Einstein among the ten most brilliant scientists who ever lived. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Why Evolution is a metaphysical hypothesis
    ... if the first living organism was beamed fully formed straight from heaven. ... My hypothesis is that that an intellect designed life and injected his ... If scientists ... and half billion years of evolution. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Mendel refutes evolution
    ... it's about how life behaves over eons. ... Abiogenesis is scarcely separate from evolution in reality. ... Vestigial features are a myth. ... He admitted that he believes scientists have an ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: THE TRUE MESSAGE OF JESUS CHRIST
    ... Evolution believes we came from rocks. ... all systems required for life and procreation had to ... Lucy, the most famous "link" to humanity, austraelopithicus, was ... After seven years of refusing to allow scientists to examine the ...
    (rec.audio.pro)
  • Re: Real simple question on ID/aliens etc
    ... IDers have an honest opinion that life is too complex to have been ... Lack of evidence does not support the ID claim. ... for scientists where evidence is tangible, ... understand the distinction between evolution and abiogenesis. ...
    (talk.origins)