|
||||
|
Creationist and intelligent design writers have often insisted that whereas minor changes may occur within an established “kind,” nothing fundamentally new can come through “random” or “undirected” evolution. But there are numerous examples of “right before our eyes” evolution in the scientific literature. Here are a few: 1974 E. Coli experiment. In a 1974 . . . → Read More: Evolution right before our eyes Introduction A central tenet of creationism is that the earth (or even the entire universe) was created over a very short period of time, either six literal days or at most 6000 years, and that this creation was completed about 4000 BCE (see Creationism). Needless to say, this worldview is in utter disagreement with the . . . → Read More: Supernovas and “God the Great Deceiver” theology Introduction A fundamental precept of evolutionary biology is that a combination of random variation and natural selection is the fundamental driving force for evolution. In contrast, skeptics of evolution, including many creationist and intelligent design writers, assert that whereas natural biological processes may result in minor changes in a single species over time, nothing fundamentally . . . → Read More: Can an evolutionary process generate English text? Why All the Fighting? The Science-Religion War from an LDS Perspective [Presentation to LDS Singles, Oakland, California, 15 May 2011 by David H. Bailey] Introduction I am sure everyone will agree that a broad understanding of modern science is indispensable in today’s society, just to be competitive in today’s high-tech job market if nothing else. . . . → Read More: Why all the fighting? Are human brains different than computers? It has been widely believed through history (and is still widely believed by many religious-minded people) that the human mind is fundamentally distinct from anything mechanical or otherwise non-living. However, as with many other beliefs of this sort, modern science has discovered many of the workings of the human . . . → Read More: Can computers think? One common area of contention in the science-religion arena is the question of miracles. Creationist and intelligent design writers, among others, often define miracles as contraventions of scientific law and quickly conclude modern science is at war with Bible-based religion. Kevin Anderson of Answers in Genesis (which operates the Creation Museum near Cincinnati, Ohio), expresses . . . → Read More: Does modern science repudiate miracles? A large fraction of the writings of creationists and intelligent design proponents can be summarized as a search for phenomena that appear to be outside the realm of what is known or possible in science. The hope is that such features of nature can then be cited as “proof” of God’s handiwork. See, for example, . . . → Read More: Can (or should) God be found in the gaps of scientific knowledge? Introduction For the majority of Judeo-Christian readers of the Bible, modern science poses no fundamental challenge to religion in general or the Bible in particular. Such readers are able to view the Bible as the inspired word of God and yet retain sufficient flexibility to accommodate modern science. At the least, they are willing to . . . → Read More: Is the Bible a scientific textbook? A central tenet of creationism is that the earth (and, in fact, the entire universe) was created over a very short period of time (either six literal days or at most 6000 years), and that this creation was completed about 4000 BCE (see Creationism). Needless to say, this worldview is in utter disagreement with the . . . → Read More: Is God a Great Deceiver? Implications of creationist geology and astronomy Creationists and other critics of evolution have long derided the notion that humans “descended from monkeys.” Of course, this isn’t what scientists claim — scientists only assert that human and monkeys (and other modern-day primates) descended from some common ancestors through a chain of intermediate species. But even when conceding this point, creationists still insist . . . → Read More: Siberian fossils were Neanderthals’ cousins, interbred with humans |
||||
|
Copyright © 2012 Science Meets Religion - All Rights Reserved |
||||
Comments are closed 