2014-02-06, 06:33 PM
Jazeon Wrote:Christian (hence creationist) and Microbiologist here. At most the only thing a debate like this will encourage is more thought on the matter and solidifying whatever views are currently held if you are are indeed an intellectual. If not, as others have said, it will cause the people who are unsure and looking for answers a biased view based on whoever is deemed the "victor" in their eyes. Don't get me wrong i'm all for debates but most people who go into debates already have their mind set on one side or another.
As for the whole "how can you practice science and hold to it's values while still believing in creation"....pretty easily to be honest. Any true scientist knows there is a whole lot we have yet to understand, a dishonest scientist will try to tell you "we have the answers based on our evidence and without a doubt, this is how it is fullstop". That being said anyone who understands science and the scientific method at it's core, knows it's finding an observable correlation between action and reaction and then saying so far this holds true and has yet to be disproven or fail, and in most fields we all know there are almost always anomalies in a theory. But that is the part that people who hold science as the end-all should really think about the "observable" part. As scientist we can only base what we know on what can be observed in some form or fashion. Given the vastness of the universe(scientifically proven lol) and regular every occurrences that are unexplainable (though in error can be attributed to theory that seems to fit) can you really say that the we as humans with our limited scope of senses and equipment, that we can say we have all the answers. For me personally no, I simply view science and as means to explain the observable, but given all the advances throughout history, and how often once again throughout history alot of what we once thought was impossible is now possible, it would be silly for me to sit back and say pfft that's impossible.
Touching on my views on creation and science converging, I would say God set up the machine called life, down to DNA, base pairs, RNA strands you name it and set it on it's way, and from that we have micro-evolution, (still not finding the evidence to support full on we came from apes thing, too many plausible solutions) degeneration, mutations etc. To me it's simple, definitely not trying to change anyone's opinion or get into a huge debate, been there done that on multiple forums over the years, just dropping my two cents on the matter.
Forgive any errors i'm at work.
Three points I'd like to address:
1. Creationist != Christian. There are plenty of Christians in science that believe in evolution.
2. micro and macro evolution exist on a continuum. It's not like one is completely different from the other. The "we descended from apes" part is not completley accurate. We diverged from apes. Evidence from psuedogenes, phylogenetics, etc pretty much confirms this.
3. From a professional perspective, unless you can muster up some physical explanation or mechanism, speculating on "how God did it" is pointless. You are not going to get any papers published on it nor are you going to get any grant money.
(Sorry if I sound like a jerk, I'm just passionate about this subject)
