Quote (sylvannos @ Feb 19 2011 09:07pm)
The issue with creationism is that it doesn't follow the scientific method. If it did, we wouldn't have this controversy.
To elaborate, creationism is based on the principle that at some point, the universe is so complex that it must have been created by a higher being. Specifically, the universe cannot have just started from nothing, and there must be some kind of divine power that created it. Creationism rejects the notion that random mutations can occur within the natural world. Mutations, of course, being what allows evolution to happen. Scientists refute creationism for this reason. The notion of creationism is based purely on observation. We lack the tools and ability to replicate or prove the existence of God. People can and have said that they've had some sort of experience with a divine power. However, there is no way to use the scientific method to prove these statements. In other words, no experiment or "ritual" can invoke the same reaction that the person claims to have experienced.
In order for a theory, such as evolution, to become a theory, it has to be physically observable and repeatable with predicted results. We can observe mutation and some stages of evolution in this way (google Galápagos finches or pepper moths). However, we cannot observe God (or a god of any kind) creating life or any parts of the universe in an observable way that is repeatable with predicted results. If we could observe God and prove his existence with the scientific method, there would be no reason for anyone to accept evolution and everyone would believe in God.
Why does "Existence" Exist?
What does it Exist inside of?
What is outside of the Universe?
If there is "Nothing" outside the universe, how does that exist?
All interesting questions.
But as far as life on this planet itself goes, Yahweh.
This post was edited by Torm1 on Feb 19 2011 10:51pm