Chuck’s whereIstand Blog

       I believe that this topic is introduced ambiguously. Original Creationism with its literal biblical view is imcompatible with almost all science.

      Intelligent Design is more appealing because it poses some vexing questions still unanswered by Biology today. As Donovan points out it just isn’t science. A scientific theory should not only explain current observations, but also make some predictions. It needs to be verifiable (at least potentially). Note the second part of this statement causes many physicists to reject string theory out of hand as many of its conjectures are not even potentially verifiable.

      Biologists attack ID as a ‘god of gaps’ theory. Ie anything not explained today must be beyond our understanding and be from God. But science’s main goal is to fill in the gaps, so this belief is not very useful of rewarding. ID is used mostly by people who come from conservative religious background and feel that current science is too difficult to reconcile with their religious beliefs. It is a little scary when someone tries to go into biological research with these ideas. But a large amount of current research uses ‘homology’, which is basically comparative genetics. It looks for a gene or protein that exists in sequence or function accross species ie ‘homologs’. It is humbling to learn that we share a lot of basic mechanisms with a jelly fish.

      But I am diverting. The previous two areas are specific challenges to scientific thinking. As such - they would qualify for a no vote ie they are incompatible with the belief in evolution even if some ID believers would object.

     The problem is this does not extend to all believers. Ie I don’t think evolution and belief in God are  contradictory.  I  guess  belief in  God by itself  is a  belief in some sort of creation - be it the laws of the universe or perhaps life. Science just tries to explain what can be explained, tested and reasonably proven. It really cannot go into areas of religion that can neither be proven or disproven.  If  I  am responding to this kind of belief system, then I must answer  - no, one can believe in creation and evolution.

       Note the bad english ‘belief in ‘ evolution. Belief implies acceptance without concrete evidence (and often inspite of strong evidence against one’s belief). Evolution is a scientific theory, not a belief. If a set of discoveries shows this theory to be wrong, it will be abandoned and replaced by a new theory that deals with the new facts. One does not believe in evolution, one accepts that it is the best theory (explanation) for the data concerning the development of species.

      Another important point, accepting evolution does not imply atheism. As pointed out by Donvan, Pope John Paul II publically accepted evolution. I am not sure that this is clear to many ID proponents.

     I think the question should either be reworded or broken into 2 :

 Does acceptance of evolution deny a belief in God (ie atheism). (My answer = No).

 Does believe in Creationism or ID (Intellegent Design) contradict the acceptance of evolution. (My answer = Yes)  

   

       I believe that this topic is introduced ambiguously. Original Creationism with its literal biblical view is imcompatible with almost all science.

      Intelligent Design is more appealing because it poses some vexing questions still unanswered by Biology today. As Donovan points out it just isn’t science. A scientific theory should not only explain current observations, but also make some predictions. It needs to be verifiable (at least potentially). Note the second part of this statement causes many physicists to reject string theory out of hand as many of its conjectures are not even potentially verifiable.

      Biologists attack ID as a ‘god of gaps’ theory. Ie anything not explained today must be beyond our understanding and be from God. But science’s main goal is to fill in the gaps, so this belief is not very useful of rewarding. ID is used mostly by people who come from conservative religious background and feel that current science is too difficult to reconcile with their religious beliefs. It is a little scary when someone tries to go into biological research with these ideas. But a large amount of current research uses ‘homology’, which is basically comparative genetics. It looks for a gene or protein that exists in sequence or function accross species ie ‘homologs’. It is humbling to learn that we share a lot of basic mechanisms with a jelly fish.

      But I am diverting. The previous two areas are specific challenges to scientific thinking. As such - they would qualify for a no vote ie they are incompatible with the belief in evolution even if some ID believers would object.

     The problem is this does not extend to all believers. Ie I don’t think evolution and belief in God are  contradictory.  I  guess  belief in  God by itself  is a  belief in some sort of creation - be it the laws of the universe or perhaps life. Science just tries to explain what can be explained, tested and reasonably proven. It really cannot go into areas of religion that can neither be proven or disproven.  If  I  am responding to this kind of belief system, then I must answer  - no, one can believe in creation and evolution.

       Note the bad english ‘belief in ‘ evolution. Belief implies acceptance without concrete evidence (and often inspite of strong evidence against one’s belief). Evolution is a scientific theory, not a belief. If a set of discoveries shows this theory to be wrong, it will be abandoned and replaced by a new theory that deals with the new facts. One does not believe in evolution, one accepts that it is the best theory (explanation) for the data concerning the development of species.

      Another important point, accepting evolution does not imply atheism. As pointed out by Donvan, Pope John Paul II publically accepted evolution. I am not sure that this is clear to many ID proponents.

     I think the question should either be reworded or broken into 2 :

 Does acceptance of evolution deny a belief in God (ie atheism). (My answer = No).

 Does believe in Creationism or ID (Intellegent Design) contradict the acceptance of evolution. (My answer = Yes)  

   

whereIstand Tags

• Does a belief in evolution necessarily contradict a belief in Creation?