Ok I'm noticing a common misconception in this thread.  Evolution makes no claim, none, nada, zip, zilch, as to the origin of life.  Evolution merely explains the complexity and diversity of life.  So the only time Evolution and Creationism conflict is when Creationism says all life was created as we know it now.  For all evolution cares life began on earth by an alien landing on Earth and farting, it is completely irrelevant to the theory.  Unless you can prove that genetic mutation does not occur and that animals less fit for survival will not die earlier than those more fit for survival then evolution stand.

DPS
that is why i pointed everyone to this site:
http://ldolphin.org/islamcreat.html

apparently, there's another religion that has the creationism theory but with evolution involved, it rejects the christian belief that god made evrything as it is..that religion is Islam

and honestly i think it has the best solution or theory in this matter
Evolution theory can't proove the real begining sort of
Creationism can't reject some of the scientific evidence of evolution

that is why they have to co-exist

God started it, and meant for evolution to happen and it did!!
and i'd suggest all of you to really thoroughly read that site, it's very interesting

and Red_Rooster, it could help you for your debate class a lot, check it out

LOL, that's awfully close minded of you
it's not The Quran, rather more of how creationism and evolution can co-exist
they first, present darwins theory and then say, the islamic perspective and the proof for that perspective and then how a lot of the things are similar, some differences and how The Quran presents the theory of evolution

PLUS proove how it had to start with the theory of creationism and scientific proof that God had to have started it..

"Sorry i dont intend to read up on the quran. and i dont think it has anything important for me to learn."

How smallminded of you.

Point remains,

Science is search of truth and understanding
Religion is believing what was made up milleniums ago

Just like was pointed our earlier, evolution has nothing to do with how life started, it has to do with how life EVOLVED, thus the name evolution.

Science is based on findings, research and investigation.
Religion is based on ancient scripture

The two of them cannot be compared, one is about search for evidence, the other is about obidience to the ancient scruptures. Please do not try to compare them.

Creatonism has no evidence other than holy scripture, nor is there any attempts to get these proofs.

Evolution was based on the findings and theory of Charles Darwin, and has later been strengtherned and supported by numerous findings and conducted researches.

["Yes, the bible does say that god created the world in 7 days. But you do not have to interpret it that way. Peronsally i beleive god created the universe, not the big bang, and then he makes a system where strong creatures live and weak creatures die out"[

There you confirm my statement in the previous post, you do not take the theory as it was made up by the writers of the ancient scripture, you alter it to fit your personal belief. Thus Creationism is nothing solid, it is a personal belief, differing grately from person to person, and is not comparative to science at all.

To be honest there is no need to discuss Evolutionisme vs. Creationism, because the real debate is between Religion or SCience, ancient fairytales or common send and search of knowledge.

I believe our world was made by processes I can't describe! So there!

> Elliot Erased wrote:

> "Sorry i dont intend to read up on the quran. and i dont think it has anything important for me to learn."

How smallminded of you.
_____________________________________-

about as small as you if you think that.

> Elliot Erased wrote:

> "Yes, the bible does say that god created the world in 7 days. But you do not have to interpret it that way. Peronsally i beleive god created the universe, not the big bang, and then he makes a system where strong creatures live and weak creatures die out."

The big bang theory is a rather well structured theory, wich seems to be supported by quantumphysics. There's nothing that even remotely hints to a godlike being..

Basibly, there's 2 ways here, following your heart or your mind. The problem starts when you blend them. Religion is an emotional system, but it can't be used in a rational way (for example: to explain the origin of life or something).

Religion is based on faith and doesnt need to explain the beginning.  its a way of life.  why should we care as to whether or not God used evolution or selective introduction to form the planet and its life forms?  why should science care if someone believes in a supreme being?

actually what it sounds like is that those who are touting science as this big shield to keep religion out of their lives are just arguing against religion because they dont want to find out whether they are wrong in their life.  they want to be able to do whatever they want.  which is fine.  they can go and do that. 

however, science should not be making sweeping arguements against something just because they cant see it.

problem with all fossil biology as proof of evolution is that a key definition of a species is lack of interbreeding of fertile offspring, and we don't know that you couldn't have had grandkids by Lucy

"Religion is based on faith and doesnt need to explain the beginning.  its a way of life.  why should we care as to whether or not God used evolution or selective introduction to form the planet and its life forms?  why should science care if someone believes in a supreme being?
actually what it sounds like is that those who are touting science as this big shield to keep religion out of their lives are just arguing against religion because they dont want to find out whether they are wrong in their life.  they want to be able to do whatever they want.  which is fine.  they can go and do that.
however, science should not be making sweeping arguements against something just because they cant see it."

Yes it should. Even more, exactly that is the very base of the scientific method.. Something that has not a single shred of evidence to prove it, should not be tolerated by science. Defenatly when it's passed on as an alternative to science I have nothing against religious people, but they have to bear in mind that there's only room for a divinity outside science. Scientific evidence is correct and true by its nature, whatever claims some religion makes that goes against it is misleading, a lie and immoral. A very clear proof of that is this: there's only 1 scientific correct result, and there are hundreds of different interpretations by different religions

In Medival times, science (proto-science would make a better term perhaps) and religion had a common goal: to understand the world to find god in it. I think that was a marvellous goal and I regret the church has become more and more irrational as a reaction to the world that has become more and more rational. I think it's for the best interest of all religion that it seeks how it can coexist with scientific discoveries.

"about as small as you if you think that."

Refusing to take a look at a source that's from another religion that shares the same root as yours, is by all means something you ought to do. Think about how silly your statement is.. You don't buy a pair of trousers without trying them on and carry them for the rest of your life, do you? You don't marry a girl for the rest of your life after only seen a single hotograph of it, do you?
It gets even worse when that same source even tries to prove the very same thing you're trying to prove, yet you consider a muslim way of thinking wrong, without even reading it. Don't judge a book by it's cover. And you defenatly shouldn't close your mind from other influences, after all, is religion not a spiritual quest? Don't let your life be influenced by only 1 book, or it'll be a poor life..

"I don't believe anything that hasn't been proven yet, but if i have to choose between scientific educated guesses (this is that life was created by molecules joining together) and some nutbags that pulled something out of their ass and wrote it in a book a kazillion years ago."

yes ive been waiting for you to say that now i can shove it in your face that molecules joining together is also pulled out of your ass. Just because darwin uses the name of science you blindly follow it like a sheep. How very small minded of you to call us all nutbags but yet your very own darwin is a great scientist. NO he pulls stuff out of his own darwinian ass as well.