US-Americans only: Creationism vs. Evolution?

This is not about being right or wrong! i´m not going to judge you for your opinion. just tell me if you think that god created life or that eveolution is your believe of choice.

Please do only vote if you´re American. you can comment if you´re from another country.

  • Life was created by a deity
    19% (3)18% (4)18% (7)Vote
  • Life evolved.
    50% (8)45% (10)47% (18)Vote
  • undecided/other (explain)
    6% (1)9% (2)8% (3)Vote
  • i´m not American and want to see
    25% (4)28% (6)27% (10)Vote
And you are? I'm a GirlI'm a Guy

0|0
3|13

Most Helpful Guy

  • Simply put God created us and original life. I believe in evolution as bacteria and life forms will adapt/evolve to their living conditions to survive. However, I do not believe that a human evolved from another species. But everything evolves

    0|0
    0|0
    • Why do you exclude humans from evolution? I mean of course nobody claims we evolved from a bird or rodent xD

    • Show All
    • i thought it would be nice to give mho to someone who could embrace both :)

    • I wish a lot of people put that much though into selecting MHO. It's because of my science background and the fact that I'm religious. Balanced is the best way to be.

What Girls Said 3

  • I'm not religious, and I know that evolution occurred. No "belief" about it. I am as certain evolution occurred as I am of any other facts about ancient history and prehistory. There is of course the slightest chance that things didn't happen that way, and a very good chance that we don't know exactly how those things happened, but thats just how it is for nearly any occurrence we take as fact.

    0|1
    0|1
    • Just ignore the downvote that's just this creepy dude that lurks in this question... He blocked me but he still bothers to downvote every non religious opinion.

  • I believe that original life was created by God. But I also believe that over the years since original creation, life forms have changed. Look at dog breeds. Look at the original bull dog and what we have now. Who's to say that every other creature on the planet hasn't gone through some physical changes in the years since the first pairs of them walked this earth? I believe that creatures have changed through generations to adapt to the new and changing environments.

    0|1
    1|0
    • so you´re kind of in between then. isn´t it part of the believe in god, that he made it to be perfect? and if it was made to be perfect, why would it change and thus need to adapt?

    • He made everything perfect and gave man free will. Man brought sin into the world and so the world lost its perfection. Ergo... species are no longer the perfection they were and needed to adapt to changing environments (ice ages, tropical ages, shifting landscapes, etc.).

    • :D well played.

  • I'm not American and I don't believe in evolution since the word "belief" implies having faith which doesn't account for all the evidence behind it. However, I accept the evidence and research that corroborates evolution.

    0|0
    0|0
    • everything needs faith because nothing can be taken as a fact. as a critical thinker it´s dangerous to just assume things are true. though i agree that the evidence is quite strong for evolution :D

    • Evolution is accepted as fact by the scientific community because of the overwhelming amount of evidence behind it, that doesn't mean that fact can't be subject to change which is why it's also considered to be a theory.

    • Though, I get what you're saying.

What Guys Said 12

  • I am irish and believetotally in evolution.

    1|3
    0|2
  • I believe in a controlled evolution. That an intelligence directs evolution. But not the God of the bible.

    0|1
    0|0
    • well evolution itself can be seen as a kind of intelligence in my opinion. works by trial and error but that´s what we do most times too :D

  • I'm not American, and I believe in evolution, it's been proven, so there shouldn't be any discussion.

    1|1
    0|1
  • I believe everything was created. But I mean I'm probably wrong, after all atheists have very scientific proof of evolution like this.

    cryingfowl.weebly.com/.../1764565_orig.jpg

    Never mind annoying little facts like this.

    blog.hmns.org/.../...y-FAlloChickenArchyViscer.jpg

    0|1
    1|0
    • actually our pictures of the dinosaurs are mostly wrong. scientists assume that most dinosaurs we know from films and books (like t-rex for example) probably had feathers too. which would make it even more plausible... but i´m not here to judge what you believe in :D being wrong is not a sin after all.

    • Show All
    • @creepycreeper Actually, you are incorrect about your dating of the oldest bird fossils. The oldest Bird was the Archaeornithura and dates to 130M years ago in the Mesozoic. Archaeopteryx is 140M years ago and the first dinosaurs were 230M years ago, easily 100 million years before the first bird.
      The reference that follows (link) can clear up the dating for you and will also explain the differences between birds and theropods. The second reference will give you an idea as to the age of the dinosaurs.
      phys.org/.../...il-world-earliest-modern-bird.html
      www.livescience.com/...aur-fossils-discovered.html

    • @creepycreeper I dont think that the Asker was trying to imply that the feathered dinosaur was an Archaeopteryx. He was simply stating that there is evidence from the fossil record that there were dinosaurs that had feathers. You assumed he was talking about an Archaeopteryx. He specifically mentioned the T-Rex. and he is correct that there is evidence that the T. Rex had feathers. see the provided link www.amnh.org/.../a-feathered-tyrant

  • To bring the thought of God into a new light for some of you. If you have a bunch of raw materials and just let them sit there over billions of years they will never turn into a watch. They would just sucumb to erosion, rust, and decay. You see the way of natur is to gradually reduce in complexity. That is why atoms have half lives and decay into less complex less radioactive isotopes. To get a watch you have to have someone make it. Someone, some creator, has to take those raw materials and form them into the gears, the cogs, and the hands. Even further the watchmaker is needed to put all of those pieces together. Now the same is true for living things. In no amount of time can you get a living thing from raw materials. Living things are incredebly complex, far more complex than a watch. So if something relatively simple such as a watch needs to be created, we can assume that living things, and yes that includes humans, must be created too.

    0|1
    1|0
    • i understand your agumentation but i don´t agree. it´s the perspective i don´t agree with. you just see point one "material" and point two "watch". well if one was trying to tell me: "yesterday material, tomorrow watch" i´d say he´s crazy... but we´re talking about billions of years. in this timespan i find it plausible that all the billions of tiny little steps necessary to form a watch (including of course the origin of life and everything) came together by coincidence.

      it´s just a choice of "what is more plausible to me" and i won´t judge you if you say "well coincidence isn´t plausible to me".

    • Show All
    • well this is exactly what happens :) so you´re right.

    • you don´t need to apologize for them :D i know their behavior is not to be attributed to christianity but to the individuals own inadequacy.

  • I voted B.

    Of course, there are many religious people who think life originally created by a deity and then evolved into other organisms.

    0|0
    0|0
  • I've heard about a survey that concluded a scary chunk of americans believed in creationism out of the 100% but I don't have the specific number.

    0|0
    0|1
  • I was made in the image of God. You all are free to believe you came from monkeys

    0|2
    1|0
    • everybody is free to believe anything ;)

    • Nobody came or evolved from monkeys (technically you mean apes), they are common ancestors.

    • that´s just the typical argument that originates from the desire to make a decision not based upon evidence but upon what one self thinks is right. you can´t argue against that.
      it´s a decision and i don´t blame anyone for making that decision.

  • I like the Prometheus theory so that should have been an option :)

    0|0
    0|0
    • vote "other" then :D would you explain that theory? i´m not sure if i know what it is.

    • Show All
    • I just wonder why life form only came to be on planet Earth and not anywhere else like Mars for example. I just don't understand why other planets that are close to us didn't develop their own evolution ya know?

    • a proper scientist could probably explain to you exactly "why" that isn´t possible. might well be that there "was" life and that we just missed it by a few billion years. though a lot of planets have been found where circumstances for the formation of life are given... we are just way too far away to check if there actually is life. mars and the other planets of our solar system are so ridiculously close compared to those planets which are likely to have life on it... and we even struggle to check those for live.

  • Theistic evolutionist.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Well evolution is not a theory but a fact. I like the way the fundamentalists insist that it is a theory. If there is a God, I wonder how they choose to speak for His methods? We know that evolution occurs around us each day and we know it is a description of the changes in the life around us.

    Part of the questioners mistake is confusing evolution with the origin of life. Evolution is not the origin of life. It is simply the fact that life changes. And it does. It is a solid fact.

    1|1
    0|1
    • well every scientific finding is a "theory" by definition. evolution as much as gravity or that 1+1 equals 2 are still a "theory". that doesn´t mean that it´s "false" though. i totally aggree with you on all the other parts.

    • Show All
    • Okay. We are looking at the definition of the word theory differently. I think it is important to separate the theories of the origins of life from the observation of evolution. I think that people get their hackles up and spend all too much time worrying about the nuts and bolts of evolution to the point that they lose the salient point of the origin of life. There are several theories as to the origin of life.

      I think that many fundamentalists take umbrage with the origin of man as a factor of the evolution of life and want to remove man's origins from the origin of life, as if it is somehow unique. For that reason, getting evolution out of the way as a process and an observable one, helps smoth the discussion of the origin of man. just my 2 cents

    • yeah as i said i agree ;) this troll just broke the flow with his crap :D i made the mistake to take him seriously too...

  • Evolution is unarguably the way life got to be as it is but who's to say God didn't create evolution?

    0|0
    0|1
    • yeah i see. this is in my opinion a good argument. just for my personal interest: how would you see the following two arguments:

      1: "on the 6th day god created man" - not evolution.

      2: "no matter what new findings science presents: god is going to be the reason for that then, even if it contradicts anything that has been said about god before, "god" will be adjusted to every new reality"

    • Show All
    • No, of course it doesn't automatically make God part of the explanation. I'm just pointing out the limitations of the scientific world view. Science must ultimately rest on unprovable assumptions in a similar way to faith. The difference really, is science is trying to limit the number of assumptions to the minimum. "Just give me one miracle and I'll explain everything else". You still always need that one miracle though. So I don't see all that much conflict between science and faith.

      Often when we ask these kinds of questions which lead to a paradox we find it's because we have framed the question wrongly.

    • yeah ok i can totally agree on that. it´s just a matter of what we call this "miracle" then.

Loading...