• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

Evolution vs. Intelligent Design

Which do you support?

  • Evolution

    Votes: 32 74.4%

  • Intelligent Design

    Votes: 11 25.6%
  • Total voters
    43
Status
Not open for further replies.
I support both to an extent. I believe in evolution, not the Adam and Eve story - but...even though I follow evolution I still believe God to be the start of it in some fashion.
 
I'm another one of those weird people who believes in both Christianity and evolution. The way I see it: God's a programmer, not a painter. In his infinite wisdom, God made a system that would use a combination of random variables and survival of the fittest to have intelligent life develop on its own over time. The story of Adam and Eve would represent the time when humanity had evolved to the point that they could contain a soul and have free will.
 
Heh...

icomeanon6 said:
I'm another one of those weird people who believes in both Christianity and evolution. The way I see it: God's a programmer, not a painter. In his infinite wisdom, God made a system that would use a combination of random variables and survival of the fittest to have intelligent life develop on its own over time. The story of Adam and Eve would represent the time when humanity had evolved to the point that they could contain a soul and have free will.
Click to expand...

I agree completely with what you have said. Finally someone has put into context what I believe. I've been looking for a way to reconcile both and you've done it.

I should have put 2 more options in the poll. Since I voted for evolution. XD
Could a mod add: Both, and No opinion. =P

Edit: It's quite the misconception that the use of the word "Theory" is the same as we use it in everyday language. It's different in the scientific community.
 
I'm a bit mixed opinion here.

I throw my faith into "intelligent design". I use to be a agnostic, at least during my freshmen year when Biology was really playing it's roll in my courses. Now I just don't find evolution, the best place for my faith, for one it's still a theory with gaps, and problems with even fossil records from what I've learned. Even if it is true I would firmly believe that it was God's way of creating life, evolution just seems too "perfect" when it comes to species evolving, that divine intervension must have happened. I rather believe in my religon that man has trusted for hundreds of years (Catholic), than theories.

Plus-
I find absolutly no love in the science of evolution.
 
UltimaLink007 said:
Evolution or a combination of both, where a "higher being" may have created the world, but they allowed it to develop, change and evolve untouched and entirely on its own.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. While I'm undecided (or rather, don't care in the least) whether there's a higher being or not, if there is, I believe it just set the gears in motion for evolution.

Other creationist theories make no sense to me.
 
I'm an evolutionist. I'm a scientist through and through, and to me the argument for evolution is stronger than it is for creationalism (but remember, this is my opinion - I'm not dictating my opinion to people, and my biology teacher at school tried for years to convince me that creationalism was correct).
 
Evolution for me - there's plentiful evidence for it! Plus, I dislike the concept of the whole Creation Story and the whole idea of a creator...
 
Evolution vs Intelligent design? are the two truly exclusive, I believe in evolution, evidence supports it, and creationism is just not possible, now, intelligent design, I believe in it to an extent, I don't believe we have a single creator who designed everything, but that life itself and the universe possesses such a design, balanced, adapted to its environment, a symbiotic relationship with everything else, I agree with Ligntning's post, life occured, and an external force set sentience in motion, providing us with what we call our souls and conscience
 
Although there are still many mysteries about how life on earth began, I feel that evolution (without influence from a higher power) is the most logical explanation. You can't really say that evolution didn't/doesn't occur...There's evidence all around us in the form of fossilized skeletons of early hominids and such. I think the real argument here is whether life spontaneously appeared and then evolved, or as others have said, was influenced by a higher power to set the path for evolution. I do believe that there is a scientific explanation for all of life's unanswered questions. However, I feel that some of these questions will never be answered, no matter what kind of technology we have. That won't really be enough to make me believe in intelligent design though...Some things wil just never have a definite answer.

Science and evolution can be proven. Intelligent design can't or hasn't established any solid evidence. So I have to go with my buddy science on this one ^___^
 
Pokemon Jupiter Version said:
Why isn't "both" one of the poll suggestions?

Can't God be the "why" and evolution be the "how"?

Hm...
Click to expand...

To accept evolution would mean that an omnipotent being exists, and science says it doesn't.

To accept God would mean that evolution happened in 2000 years, and that rocks from 4 billion years ago don't actually exist.

Oh, and intelligent design is such a crock. It has absolutely no evidence to back it up. At least creationism has a really old book.
 
Penguin13 said:
To accept evolution would mean that an omnipotent being exists, and science says it doesn't.

To accept God would mean that evolution happened in 2000 years, and that rocks from 4 billion years ago don't actually exist.
Click to expand...
note that the other poll option says "intelligent design", not "creationaism", I agree with him, and I aid in my post the two aren't mutually exclusive
 
Penguin13 said:
Yes, but God is to creationism as generic omnipotent being is to intelligent design.
Click to expand...
indeed, yet you used arguments that are relevant to creationism, not this theory, also read my post up in this thread, and you'l see my views on this^^
 
Lightning said:
I agree with this. While I'm undecided (or rather, don't care in the least) whether there's a higher being or not, if there is, I believe it just set the gears in motion for evolution.

Other creationist theories make no sense to me.
Click to expand...
I actually believe this is called something like the "Clockmaker Theory," and was believed if I remember correctly by Sir Isaac Newton. Where God, like a Clockmaker created the universe, and as the Clockmaker leaves their clocks to work on their own after they're built, God left the universe as it was to develop on its own. I'll try to look it up later, it was either in a video or my World History textbook last year for some reason...
 
Penguin13 said:
To accept evolution would mean that an omnipotent being exists, and science says it doesn't.

To accept God would mean that evolution happened in 2000 years, and that rocks from 4 billion years ago don't actually exist.

Oh, and intelligent design is such a crock. It has absolutely no evidence to back it up. At least creationism has a really old book.
Click to expand...
That's not what I said. Sometimes the Bible can be full of sh*t. Intellegent Design and Creationism is too.

I said that God could have sparked life, but it was evolution that drove it beyond the first bacterium. I believe in God, I believe He started life but I believe He just went off and did other things when life was evolving and doin' it's own thing.

Besides, God doesn't have to be a "being". He can be a force, the laws that hold the universe together or even every single little particle that makes up the entire universe. You also don't have to believe everything in the Bible to believe in a god, and you don't have to believe in their interpretation of it.

Isn't it nice being an individual?
 
UltimaLink007 said:
I actually believe this is called something like the "Clockmaker Theory," and was believed if I remember correctly by Sir Isaac Newton. Where God, like a Clockmaker created the universe, and as the Clockmaker leaves their clocks to work on their own after they're built, God left the universe as it was to develop on its own. I'll try to look it up later, it was either in a video or my World History textbook last year for some reason...
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure this is also called deism.

I can't remember if I posted in here already not, but I'm on the "who gives a dang!?" side of things. There's better things we can be focusing our resources on.
 
Penguin13 said:
To accept evolution would mean that an omnipotent being exists, and science says it doesn't.
Click to expand...

Hum hum where does exactly God takes part in evolution? I think creating the world is something that came before evolution, meaning it's not part of it (as everyone says, they say "God put the beings and they started evolving, AKA God isn't involved in evolution itself).

And as far as I know, science also has an atheistic explanation for that (which I support), the Big Bang.

And David, that's correct for what I know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top