|
I believe that Science rather than Evolution, is the religion. Evolution is a scientific theory.
It's like I've said before. Like "God", Evolution cannot be proved or disproved, they're simply
ideas. Some people believe while others don't. It's all in one's perspective. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I believe this comment : Evolution is a religion. Evolution is the faith of
atheism because it replaces God with man. When you've conned yourself into believing that some kind
of ancient slime morphed into progressively complex and directional life forms, you are in the realm
of faith, not science. |
| |
 v00v  28 Oct 2008 01:07
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
While a religion may be a set of beliefs, science is a set of rules. People who "believe" in
evolutionactually understand that, as far as science can take us now, evolution is correct. People
don't follow evolution blindly- every week some evidence is found that disproves a part of our
current knowledge, so we revise, revise. If one day evolution turns out BY SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE to be
completely false, then it will be debunked. As of now, no science evidence disproves evolution as a
whole- though we do have anomalies possibly disproving parts of it. It is not a all or nothing
thing. We keep the correct parts and discard the wrong. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Evolution is one belief. A religion is a set of beliefs. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Isn't gross ignorance wonderful? |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
You cheapen the concept of "religion" by claiming evolution is just another one of them. Evolution
is a theory within science, it presents no moral guidance and no concept of an afterlife. Your
comparison is not even comparing apples and oranges, it's comparing apples and the Pythagorean
theorem.
What you reveal when you constantly compare evolution to religion is your own fear that it has
validity at least equal to your religious beliefs. Otherwise, why even bother to compare them? |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I'm guessing your logic for this is because of the 'theory' part. In which case are you going to
state that every single scientific theory out there is a religion as well? |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Evolution is a theory, not a relogous cult. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Religion and science are entirely separate. Further more they are not mutually exclusive nor are
they necessarily contradictory. In fact I know many scientists and most have strong religious
beliefs. Science is merely a methodology for understanding the natural universe. Religion is the
search for a higher meaning and purpose. Evolution is just trying to understand the nature and
development of life on earth. Why would god be against understanding the truth of life? Our
understanding of evolution may never be perfect, but it gets better every day. The conflict between
religion and science is in my opinion has been encouraged for political purposes. It is unnecessary
and counterproductive. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Religion is belief in and worship of a superhuman deity. Your syntax denies this, asserting,
essentially, that it, religion, is simply a set of beliefs. The differentiation is that religious
beliefs have little to no evidence supporting them when, conversely, evolution has little to no
evidence opposing it. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I've already explained on several other debates why evolution is not a religion, so I'm not going to
bother giving a long explanation here. I'll just vote on the red side. Hizashi has already pretty
much covered it all.
This one is the best example of why evolution is not a religion. I'm quoting Hizashi here.
'Religions almost always include reverence for and/or belief in a supernatural power(s). Evolution
does not."
P.S. Evolution is spelled with an "l" not an "i".
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I posted on a debate almost exactly like this one not too long ago. To save myself the trouble of
typing more than needed, I’ll quote a few of the main differences between science and religion
(specifically evolution in this case) that I used last time, as well as my final point from the
previous debate identical to this one.
- Religions normally describe the place and role of humans within reality. Evolution describes only
the mechanics of how biological organisms operate.
- Religions almost always include reverence for and/or belief in a supernatural power(s). Evolution
does not.
- Religious ideas are usually static. They normally only change by splitting off into new religions.
Theories in science change rapidly as new evidence is found. The latter is also true for
evolution.
Furthermore, how can a religion not have any supporters? When someone is asked what their religion
is, many, perhaps most, scientists will call themselves members of a mainstream religion, such as
Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, ect. None that I’m currently aware of identify their religion as
“evolution”. If evolution truly is a religion, it is the only religion that is rejected to
actually be a religion by all its members.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
The basis for evolution is science. The basis for religion is faith. If you have no faith you have
no religion. |
| |
|
| |
| | |
