Funny Evolution vs Creationism cartoons

[Henry]

I can show you, but you'll need a duck, a witch, and a scale... and about 3-4 hours of free time.

...

Who are you who is so wise in the ways of science?

[PeterMP]

Seems simple enough to me I wont get why I catch so much crap for it.

Because some people are insecure in their faith, and they must believe everything in the bible or they are scared they will end up believing none of it:

"Then God said, "Let there be a dome in the middle of the waters, to separate one body of water from the other." And so it happened:
7 God made the dome, and it separated the water above the dome from the water below it. 8 God called the dome "the sky." Evening came, and morning followed--the second day. "
Clearly, there is no dome in the sky. As per the thread about the mars rovers, we now have space vehicles on the edge of our solar system, and they still have not hit a dome.

[techboy]

I'm a Christian. As such, I believe in Creationism. However, I also believe in Evolution.

This position is very much inside the pale of orthodoxy. Further, my answer was not really intended to imply that there is necessarily a dichotomoy, or that it is impossible to believe both.

It is also within the pale of orthodoxy, of course, to take Genesis literally.

Why is it logical to believe in Christianity?

I'll spare everyone the lengthy citations, and sum it up briefly (for me ).

It is my position that the Ressurection is a demonstrable historical event. I am of the belief that using the process of inference to the best explanation, when considering all the evidence, that the theory that best fits the data is that Jesus rose from the dead. Funnily enough, inference to the best explanation is the way evolution is established as well, since although we can test elements of the theory in the lab, there's no way we can directly test what happened thousands or millions of years ago.

Having used the process of inference to the best explanation to establish that the Ressurection occurred, I then find it logical to think that Christianity and the Bible are correct. This is perhaps not provable in the same way I can offer evidence for the historicity of the Ressurection, but I think that if a person accepts the Ressurection, it sort of naturally follows that he accepts Christianity. Unless you're Pinchas Lapide (An Orthodox Jewish scholar who has been convinced by the evidence that Jesus was raised from the dead by God, but did not become a Christian).

Once one is a Christian, it is rational to believe that evolution played a part, and Genesis is allegory, or that Genesis is literal history, and that modern science is somehow wrong. No scientific theory is ever 100% provable, so maybe the truth lies in that .00001% (or whatever the uncertainty level is).

[rincewind]

I'll spare everyone the lengthy citations, and sum it up briefly (for me ).

It is my position that the Ressurection is a demonstrable historical event. I am of the belief that using the process of inference to the best explanation, when considering all the evidence, that the theory that best fits the data is that Jesus rose from the dead. Funnily enough, inference to the best explanation is the way evolution is established as well, since although we can test elements of the theory in the lab, there's no way we can directly test what happened thousands or millions of years ago.

Having used the process of inference to the best explanation to establish that the Ressurection occurred, I then find it logical to think that Christianity and the Bible are correct. This is perhaps not provable in the same way I can offer evidence for the historicity of the Ressurection, but I think that if a person accepts the Ressurection, it sort of naturally follows that he accepts Christianity. Unless you're Pinchas Lapide (An Orthodox Jewish scholar who has been convinced by the evidence that Jesus was raised from the dead by God, but did not become a Christian).

This sounds an awful lot like faith, not logic. Two concepts that, to me, do not go hand in hand at all - hell, they may be polar opposites.

[DCsportsfan53]

I don't understand why people even feel the need to apply logic to religion. It's faith, it's not supposed to be grounded in evidence and logic. That's the opposite of faith. If it was a religion was a logical conclusion, it wouldn't require faith.

[81artmonk]

[QUOTE=smitity]Here's the big difference. The scientific method is actively applied to evolution in many many studies. And these studies have supported the idea of evolution. Find me some good scientific studies supporting creationism. The best I've ever been able to find is people saying "well how do you explain x,y, z?" The inability to explain something using a certain theory is not evidence against that theory or supporting to opposing theory....unless you can prove scientifically that the opposing theory works. Without proof of creationism/intelligent design, all you can say is that we don't fully understand the mechanisms of evolution.

You can't apply the scientific method to a matter of faith, just like we'll never find scientific proof that god exists.



I never said evolution didn't exsist. I just said there is no scientific proof that evolution was how we got here. Are there things here and there that point to that, sure, but you can't take one or two things that are likely,and say that it "is". Creationism and evolutionism both have to be taken on faith. To take something as complex as even the human body and say that it has evolved over time from something very simple to the complex form we know today is just as insane to a evolutionist as saying God created everything.

[PokerPacker]

I just said there is no scientific proof that evolution was how we got here.

yup, absolutely no scientific proof what-so-ever

[Jumbo]

EVOLUTION


When you were a tadpole and I was a fish
In the Paleozoic time,
And side by side on the ebbing tide
We sprawled through the ooze and slime,
Or skittered with many a caudal flip
Through the depths of the Cambrian fen,
My heart was rife with the joy of life,
For I loved you even then.

Mindless we lived and mindless we loved
And mindless at last we died;
And deep in the rift of the Caradoc drift
We slumbered side by side.
The world turned on in the lathe of time,
The hot lands heaved amain,
Till we caught our breath from the womb of death
And crept into light again.

We were amphibians, scaled and tailed,
And drab as a dead man's hand;
We coiled at ease 'neath the dripping trees
Or trailed through the mud and sand.
Croaking and blind, with our three-clawed feet,
Writing a language dumb,
With never a spark in the empty dark
To hint at a life to come.

Yet happy we lived and happy we loved,
And happy we died once more;
Our forms were rolled in the clinging mold
Of a Neocomian shore.
The eons came and the eons fled
And the sleep that wrapped us fast
Was riven away in a newer day
And the night of death was past.

Then light and swift through the jungle trees
We swung in our airy flights,
Or breathed in the balms of the fronded palms
In the hush of the moonless nights;
And, oh! what beautiful years were there
When our hearts clung each to each;
When life was filled and our senses thrilled
In the first faint dawn of speech.

Thus life by life and love by love
We passed through the cycles strange,
And breath by breath and death by death
We followed the chain of change.
Till there came a time in the law of life
When over the nursing side
The shadows broke and the soul awoke
In a strange, dim dream of God.

I was thewed like an Auroch bull
And tusked like the great cave bear;
And you, my sweet, from head to feet
Were gowned in your glorious hair.
Deep in the gloom of a fireless cave,
When the night fell o'er the plain
And the moon hung red o'er the river bed
We mumbled the bones of the slain.

I flaked a flint to a cutting edge
And shaped it with brutish craft;
I broke a shank from the woodland lank
And fitted it, head and haft;
Then I hid me close to the reedy tarn
Where the mammoth came to drink;
Through the brawn and bone I drove the stone
And slew him upon the brink.

Loud I howled through the moonlit wastes,
Loud answered our kith and kin;
From west to east to the crimson feast
The clan came tramping in.
O'er joint and gristle and padded bone
We fought and clawed and tore,
And cheek by jowl with many a growl
We talked the marvel o'er.

I carved the fight on a reindeer bone
With rude and hairy hand;
I pictured his fall on the cavern wall
That men might understand.
For we lived by blood and the right of might
Ere human laws were drawn,
And the age of sin did not begin
Till our brutal tush were gone.

And that was a million years ago
In a time that no man knows;
Yet here tonight in the mellow light
We sit at Delmonico's.
Your eyes are deep as the Devon springs,
Your hair is dark as jet,
Your years are few, your life is new,
Your soul untried, and yet -

Our trail is on the Kimmeridge clay
And the scarp of the Purbeck flags;
We have left our bones in the Bagshot stones
And deep in the Coralline crags;
Our love is old, our lives are old,
And death shall come amain;
Should it come today, what man may say
We shall not live again?

God wrought our souls from the Tremadoc beds
And furnished them wings to fly;
He sowed our spawn in the world's dim dawn,
And I know that it shall not die,
Though cities have sprung above the graves
Where the crook-bone men make war
And the oxwain creaks o'er the buried caves
Where the mummied mammoths are.

Then as we linger at luncheon here
O'er many a dainty dish,
Let us drink anew to the time when you
Were a tadpole and I was a fish.

- Langdon Smith

[PeterMP]

I never said evolution didn't exsist. I just said there is no scientific proof that evolution was how we got here. Are there things here and there that point to that, sure, but you can't take one or two things that are likely,and say that it "is".

I've addressed this. Proving anything in Chem. and Biology at the molecular level is essentially impossible. Have you heard Heisenberg's Uncertaininty Principle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle)? Essentially, the same thing happens. How can you be sure your method of measuring has not intefered w/ what you are measuring, but there is good fossil, DNA, and computer simulations that all strongly support evolution.

To take something as complex as even the human body and say that it has evolved over time from something very simple to the complex form we know today is just as insane to a evolutionist as saying God created everything.

This is the weakest arguement I've ever heard for Creationism. This is the same thing people said for centruies about things that are now explained w/ what we consider simple science. The rainbow comes to mind. It doesn't make sense, it is complex, it must be from God.

[ChampSkinsFanatic]

Anyone see the opening of the Simpsons last night, where Homer started off as a cell and became Homer...then he passes Moe who is 'devolving into a rat'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEtNYkFayaY Thats the Simpsons opening there, I'm for creationism by the way