I see a celestial Darwin has put in an appearance

[CleanShavenJesus]

If an observation of the Universe has been tested repeatedly and finally becomes a descriptive model that not only explains whatever is under scrutiny but also can be used to makes predictions of how it ought to behave under varying circumstances, it becomes a theory. Even then, after reaching such a lofty height, it will continue to be tested against new observations and new advances in investigative methods. As it passes each test, confidence in the truth of the theory increases; even more so when it corresponds with other theories in different but related fields.

What in creationism comes anywhere close to that?

I do not believe creationism has to follow the same rules HUMANS have put forth in proving theories and other hypotheses (sp?). I believe it is above our minds and our reasoning.

But think about it - creationism (and Christianity) can account for so many things: how the universe came into being, how we came into being, how everything around us has come into being in such a beautiful way (many scientific theories try to convince that these things just happened to align this way?)

Granted, I have a limited understanding of evolution, but creationism seems to make much more sense to me. But again, I believe creationism is above us. I'm even uncomfortable giving it a term.

[Dee Dee Ramone]

If an observation of the Universe has been tested repeatedly and finally becomes a descriptive model that not only explains whatever is under scrutiny but also can be used to makes predictions of how it ought to behave under varying circumstances, it becomes a theory. Even then, after reaching such a lofty height, it will continue to be tested against new observations and new advances in investigative methods. As it passes each test, confidence in the truth of the theory increases; even more so when it corresponds with other theories in different but related fields.

What in creationism comes anywhere close to that?

I do not believe creationism has to follow the same rules HUMANS have put forth in proving theories and other hypotheses (sp?). I believe it is above our minds and our reasoning.

But think about it - creationism (and Christianity) can account for so many things: how the universe came into being, how we came into being, how everything around us has come into being in such a beautiful way (many scientific theories try to convince that these things just happened to align this way?)

Granted, I have a limited understanding of evolution, but creationism seems to make much more sense to me. But again, I believe creationism is above us. I'm even uncomfortable giving it a term.

First you say god's plan is so enormous, we can not reason about it.
Then we need to think about creationism...and then you confess you know nothing of evolution. But that doesn't matter, because creationism is so above us, it makes you uncomfortable.
Well then, why the fuck are we even communicating here?

[Ryantology]

But think about it - creationism (and Christianity) can account for so many things: how the universe came into being, how we came into being, how everything around us has come into being in such a beautiful way (many scientific theories try to convince that these things just happened to align this way?)

So what? I can make up a story, right now, which accounts for everything:

A thousand times a thousand years ago, the great Serpent Izkabal laid a spotted egg, from which hatched all the stars and planets and all the people on them.

Once upon a time, an apple fell from the great tree Yabsobrin which landed in the lush soil. A seed from within the apple split open and the universe emerged from within it.

Two eagle-faced gods got into a fistfight, and at one point, their fists connected with such force that the explosion was what we call the Big Bang.

On a higher plane of existence, a child creates a computer program which simulates an entire, dynamic universe complete with 'living' creatures, and this is us.

It's not hard to do. What's hard is showing that these stories are accurate. Good luck with yours.

It boggles the mind how creationists say "you believe things just happened to work out so that things are the way they are?" as if that is somehow more ridiculous than "invisible, silent magic sky daddy snapped fingers and everything just happened".

[Cyberman]

I do not believe creationism has to follow the same rules HUMANS have put forth in proving theories and other hypotheses (sp?). I believe it is above our minds and our reasoning.

Ah - then creationism fails the first criterion for being a science.

But think about it - creationism (and Christianity) can account for so many things: how the universe came into being, how we came into being, how everything around us has come into being in such a beautiful way (many scientific theories try to convince that these things just happened to align this way?)

What would these explanations be?

Granted, I have a limited understanding of evolution, but creationism seems to make much more sense to me. But again, I believe creationism is above us. I'm even uncomfortable giving it a term.

Limited understanding is not an insurmountable problem, as long as one is open to discovery. That's why the God hypothesis is not an answer, because (among other things) it instantly locks the mind from investigating further. It's like when you can't find your car keys; you look in the most obvious places until you find them, then you stop looking. But what if the keys you found are not your car keys? If you stop investigating, you may never find them.

As for what makes sense: unfortunately, the Universe is generally unaware and moreover uninterested in what makes sense to us. For centuries, rainbows were regarded as magical because nobody could figure out how they were so perfectly formed and how all those colours knew how to arrange themselves. Now, of course, most of us - with a few notable exceptions - not only know the secret to this magic, but would find such primitive musings rather silly.

[Shell B]

I'm not too sure if the historical Darwin would have appreciated having his image right next to the word atheist though. All he really did was reject Christianity in later life because he disagreed with the doctrine of hell. If you read the Origin of Species he used the word God quite a lot in there.

No one is associating him with atheism. Most atheists here are well aware that Charles Darwin was not an atheist, though he had significant crises of faith. It is his fucking birthday. The forum is celebrating. Get over it.

[Confused Ape]

Two eagle-faced gods got into a fistfight, and at one point, their fists connected with such force that the explosion was what we call the Big Bang.

I really like that one. Can I start a new religion based on it?

[Nine]

Anyone else find a creationist turning up on Darwin day to be a bit suspicious?

[Napoléon]

They both believe in theories

Oh for fuck sake another muppet who doesn't understand what the fuck a theory is.

Guessing you'll just be telling us how germ theory, atomic theory, special relativity etc are all just theories.

[Cyberman]

Ah, but do you believe in them? Or just enjoy the benefits of them, like everyone else - including creationists?

[Napoléon]

Nothing to do with believing, it's to do with evidence and testable outcomes. As insanity said, all theories are not equal. I think calling creationism a theory is insulting to the definition of a theory.