Creation vs. Evolution

[snydley]

So lets talk a little about this argument of creation or intelligence vs. evolution. My personal belief here is that the earth, universe, and everything in it was created by a higher being, someone greater than us all. I want to hear from all of you...What do you think? Lets talk a little about this and about the different sides to it. Give me your opinion, but back it up with evidence.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by snydley

SMy personal belief here is that the earth, universe, and everything in it was created by a higher being, someone greater than us all.

<...>

Give me your opinion, but back it up with evidence.

You first.

[snydley]

Ok. Lets start off with probability. What is the probability that something as complex as the earth could have just formed out of nothing? That is a number that I don't believe anyone has found.

Maybe something smaller would be easer to grasp. Say we took 20 cards and numbered them 1 through 20, one number on each. Then we laid them down, mixed them up and picked them back up. What are the odds of putting them back down in order from 1 to 20 without looking? It comes out to be something like 1/2,432,902,008,176,640,000. It's simply found by multiplying 1x2x3x4...ect. all up to 20. And what if then you wanted to do it twice in a row? It would be 2,432,902,008,176,640,000 x 2,432,902,008,176,640,000. That is a big number.

How about the human eye. The odds of every little thing in the human eye to evolve to how it is today would take something like 1/10 to the 20th power. Charles Darwin said this about the human eye:
To suppose that the human eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree . . .. The belief that an organ as perfect as the eye could have formed by natural selection is more than enough to stagger anyone s imagination.

So the chances of the earth forming from nothing and becoming what it is today, the chances of the human eye evolving into what it is today, the chances of laws such as gravity being like they are, or the fact that the earth is just so positioned that life can actually be sustained, or that if any one element would be off just a touch, if the gravity wasn't just right, if the tilt of the earth wasn't just so, then none of us would be here, none of these could have just happened or evolved, because the chances of these happening are so great that it is not possible. There had to be someone greater than us fine tuning every detail so that life can actually exist. That is the only possible explanation.

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by snydley

Ok. Lets start off with probability. What is the probability that something as complex as the earth could have just formed out of nothing? That is a number that I don't believe anyone has found.

The Earth did not form out of nothing. Planets are not as rare as you make them to be.

Maybe something smaller would be easer to grasp. Say we took 20 cards and numbered them 1 through 20, one number on each. Then we laid them down, mixed them up and picked them back up. What are the odds of putting them back down in order from 1 to 20 without looking? It comes out to be something like 1/2,432,902,008,176,640,000. It's simply found by multiplying 1x2x3x4...ect. all up to 20. And what if then you wanted to do it twice in a row? It would be 2,432,902,008,176,640,000 x 2,432,902,008,176,640,000. That is a big number.

I fail to draw the comparison between 20 inanimate cards and biogenesis. Nonetheless, that is a big number, but it is not infinity.

How about the human eye. The odds of every little thing in the human eye to evolve to how it is today would take something like 1/10 to the 20th power. Charles Darwin said this about the human eye:
To suppose that the human eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree . . .. The belief that an organ as perfect as the eye could have formed by natural selection is more than enough to stagger anyone s imagination.

What about bird eyes, or cockroach eyes?
I agree with Darwin in the sense that it seems unlikely that the eye developed in so many creatures through natural selection alone.

So the chances of the earth forming from nothing and becoming what it is today, the chances of the human eye evolving into what it is today, the chances of laws such as gravity being like they are, or the fact that the earth is just so positioned that life can actually be sustained, or that if any one element would be off just a touch, if the gravity wasn't just right, if the tilt of the earth wasn't just so, then none of us would be here, none of these could have just happened or evolved, because the chances of these happening are so great that it is not possible. There had to be someone greater than us fine tuning every detail so that life can actually exist. That is the only possible explanation.

You underestimate the power of chaos.

In regards to the title of this thread, evolution does not deal with the earth forming, gravity, or even biogenesis, so the initial argument is moot to begin with.
Furthermore, declaring that a higher power is the only possible explanation is not valid science. To be able to make such a claim in a scientific setting requires you to develop ways to make testable predictions about your theory. Otherwise, this topic is not really appropriate for the Biology forum imho.

[snydley]

Ok, so what is your theory of how the earth, this universe and all the planets, how they were formed?

The card illustration is just a smaller example of how seemingly impossible it can be to get something (such as 20 cards to line up numerically after mixing them up) to fall into place perfectly with no flaws or mistakes. We are talking about Creation vs. Evolution here, the probability that the earth, the universe and everything in it would fall into place like that has a very very probability.

The examples of the eye are prime examples of what I am talking about. Each eye for each species is specifically made to suit that specific species. If there was anything different, then it would be worthless and ineffective. But each eye is fine tuned to the needs of each creature.

So tell me about chaos then? Explain to me this theory of chaos and how it worked.

Finally explain to me why intelligence is not valid science? When scientists get together, talk about different issues such as the fine tuning of cells and the mechanics that go into them and the machines that make them up, when they get together and talk of such things and all of them agree that there is no possible way that any of that could have evolved or formed from another living organism (biogenesis), if they get together and say things like that, why cannot that be an acceptable form of science? Why can't testing and examining something like cells and their parts, and come to the realization that there is absolutely no way that this was formed by chance...why can't that be an acceptable form of science?

[jab2]

Originally Posted by snydley

The examples of the eye are prime examples of what I am talking about. Each eye for each species is specifically made to suit that specific species. If there was anything different, then it would be worthless and ineffective. But each eye is fine tuned to the needs of each creature.

Why is it that people think the eye as we know it today, should have developed spontaneous from nothing to a fully functional eye with all its sub-part?

Do you realise that your skin is also an "eye", it being able to detect light in the IR region?

It might help to read the following.

The eye is too complex to have evolved.

Evolution of the eye

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by snydley

Ok, so what is your theory of how the earth, this universe and all the planets, how they were formed?

What does this have to do with evolution?

[Ahmabeliever]

Originally Posted by snydley

Ok. Lets start off with probability. What is the probability that something as complex as the earth could have just formed out of nothing? That is a number that I don't believe anyone has found.

What is the probability of God just appearing out of nothing and being so all powerful he made the universe for kicks.

Who made God? Did God evolve?

Turtles, all the way down.

[C1ay]

Originally Posted by snydley

So lets talk a little about this argument of creation or intelligence vs. evolution.

It's a pointless argument. Evolution IS NOT a theory of the origin of life, it is about the adaptation and mutation of life that results in new species. It makes no predictions of where or how life began.

Intelligent design, creation by another name, is about the origin of life, not the adaptation and/or mutation of species.

The two are not competing theories, nor are they mutually exclusive, i.e. the proof or disproof of either does not support or refute the other. The attack on evolution does reveal something about the character of those that believe in creation vs evolution though. They have a poor understanding of what evolution actually is and because of that they think that casting doubt on evolution somehow bolsters their theory of creation. The fact is that they could completely disprove evolution and it would provide zero support for creation as a valid alternative since its not an alternative at all. They would do well to quit trying to attack evolution, learn some science and try to actually put forth some measurable, testable evidence of their creation theory. Until then they are arguing with nothing more than faith, the same mentality children use as proof of Santa Clause. Perhaps they will learn someday that faith is an obstacle to the pursuit of truth.

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by C1ay

It's a pointless argument. Evolution IS NOT a theory of the origin of life, it is about the adaptation and mutation of life that results in new species. It makes no predictions of where or how life began.

Intelligent design, creation by another name, is about the origin of life, not the adaptation and/or mutation of species.

The two are not competing theories, nor are they mutually exclusive, i.e. the proof or disproof of either does not support or refute the other. The attack on evolution does reveal something about the character of those that believe in creation vs evolution though. They have a poor understanding of what evolution actually is and because of that they think that casting doubt on evolution somehow bolsters their theory of creation. The fact is that they could completely disprove evolution and it would provide zero support for creation as a valid alternative since its not an alternative at all. They would do well to quit trying to attack evolution, learn some science and try to actually put forth some measurable, testable evidence of their creation theory. Until then they are arguing with nothing more than faith, the same mentality children use as proof of Santa Clause. Perhaps they will learn someday that faith is an obstacle to the pursuit of truth.