Quote:
Originally Posted by passingbat
It seems that from a science perspective, without absolute proof on a specific matter, it's a case of 'what model fits best'. Some believe Creation fits best and some believe Evolution fits best. That's why Creation and Evolution are both a belief/faith issue; each person chooses which set of scientists to believe.
The integrated message of the whole Bible, given it's authorship timespan of 2000 years by multiple authors, shows 'intelligent design' to me.
|
Isn't it more the case of "what model fits [the evidence] best"? You can believe any model you can imagine but until you have objective, demonstrable evidence as proof, you would not have be able to present the model as a viable scientific theory.
---------- Post added at 16:56 ---------- Previous post was at 16:52 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by RizzyKing
I'll be happy when Dawkins isn't held up as some representative for all atheists out there as the man only represents himself and his own ignorance and prejudice, majority of atheists are like me in my experience in that we have made our choice and respect others to make theirs whether they are the same or different. As for the rest of it Bible or science doesn't really matter individually follow whatever one makes you happier or just seems more acceptable. Don't understand why topics like this always have to end up confrontational and divisive.
|
I don't think he is being held up as such. He is a renowned scientist and has strongs views on the subject, as do a lot of people. His personal style and his sometimes, stupid remarks can and do alienate people but that does not negate all he has to say.