I believe in creation all the way. c: This year I'm taking biology, and no matter which angle you look a things in nature, they always work out so perfectly. Nature can't just throw up random stuff and expect it all to turn out well. <br /><br />Also, humans aren't the same as monkeys or any other animal. Physically, they may be similar, but somewhere along the line, there's a distinction. Humans have thoughts and feelings and language. How can you explain this? Sure, some animals do have very primitive forms of this, but they do not experience it nearly as vividly as we do. Humans have souls, animal don't.<br /><br />And everyone, there is no proof to creation, you just have to trust in it. Hence the term faith. :D<br /><br />

i am not saying evolushion has not been tested i believe IN eveloushion. we are debateing right now the topic of the big bang "theory" and weather or not it should be called a Theory or a Working Hypothesis

ok the way i see it yes there is a God, but i dont think its a God that is always there and pokeing his nose into things constently not the big brother looking over your shoulder deal everyone seems to say exsists. Why do i believe there is a God, well its quite simple 1 degree one way or the other there would be no us, no "life" on this planet after the big bang.<br /><br />Page 4 3rd post from the top

I've read every single post of yours. Don't imply that I haven't. I was replying to that one post alone.

Okay im going to copy and PAST what i alredy said 4 times before because no one seems to back read.

Wait, are you suggesting that evolution has not been tested? Then where did we get all of our information on it, out of thin air? It's been tested and tested and tested, which is why it's a theory, not a hypothesis.

It qualifies as a theory.<br /><br />Evolutionary theory <i>has </i>been tested, and quite a bit! Darwin's work in the Galapagos, for one, was incredibly extensive yet only touched the tip of what scientists since have been able to discover by expanding on his ideas and hypotheses.<br /><br /><i>The word theory, when used by scientists, refers to an explanation of reality that has been thoroughly tested so that most scientists agree on it. It can be changed if new information is found. Theory is different from a working hypothesis, which is a theory that hasn't been fully tested; that is, a hypothesis is an unproven theory.</i> (from <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory">here</a>)<br /><br />The general consensus of the scientific community is that evolution is scientifically sound, and - even if unprovable - proven to the extent any reasonable person can expect. Therefore, it is a theory, not a working hypothesis.

yes and i believe in both evolushion AND god. But i think they should still look into changeing it from Theory, to what it acculy is a Working Hypothesis. When people think Theory they think proven, its not proven, its not tested, it tends to confuse a lot of people. Just tell it like it is a Educated Guess, nothing more nothing less.

Well, it's...as proven as a scientific theory can be. No one calls it Darwin's Fact of Evolution. It's Darwin's Theory of Evolution. That should be sufficient.

i agree with part of that statement, but i also believe that do to the fact that they CANT test the "theory" it should be deemed as it is a hypothesis, a working hypothesis but its still a hypothesis a Educated Guess. NOT to be taken as pure fact.

---