Creation vs Evolution

Both creation and evolution can be true. If you follow the big bang theory it starts out with a Giant star exploding causing a supernova which in turn smashes together nebulas creating new stars and the left over’s creates planets. After millions of years the atmosphere becomes stable and life starts to evolve. (simplified explanation of the big bang)

Creations point. Where did the very first Star come from? Where did the first nebula come from? Where did the universe come from? They can answer God. So God created the universe and the first Giant star and the first nebula, and everything after that was evolution.

It is just as likely as any other theory. I happen to think Creation is silly but that’s just because I don't believe in magic.

Then you are apparently not familiar with "spontaneous generation"

Originally posted by Alliance
Then you are apparently not familiar with "spontaneous generation"

I'm familiar with it, and it was disproven and laid to rest in 1859 by Louis Pasteur.

Originally posted by dirkdirden
I'm familiar with it, and it was disproven and laid to rest in 1859 by Louis Pasteur.

I apolgize, you slipped your post in while I was responding to someone else.

Originally posted by Alliance
I apolgize, you slipped your post in while I was responding to someone else.

O well it works as a sarcastic response to mine as well.

Another example of evolution in the real world:

http://www.livescience.com/animalworld/061220_virgin_births.html

Thats not evolution.

Originally posted by Alliance
Thats not evolution.

Then explain why god made it that way.

I'm not saying that he did. I'm sying you misused the term evolution.

Evolution happens at the population level, not the individual level. While the species did evolve to have this characteristic, this trait was not actively evolving.

Originally posted by Alliance
I'm not saying that he did. I'm sying you misused the term evolution.

Evolution happens at the population level, not the individual level. While the species did evolve to have this characteristic, this trait was not actively evolving.

I am not talking about actively evolving; evolving characteristics that are contrary to creationism is what I am talking about. The only way this could have happened is evolution.

😬

Originally posted by Alliance
😬

If you hold that face too long, it might stick like that. 😆

No it wont. All you did was demonstrate that Komodos have a trait that many other species have.

Its not evolution, it doesn't prove evolution, it doesn't say anything about evolution, it simply proves that we have lax observational skills.

Originally posted by Alliance
No it wont. All you did was demonstrate that Komodos have a trait that many other species have.

Its not evolution, it doesn't prove evolution, it doesn't say anything about evolution, it simply proves that we have lax observational skills.

I think you are wrong. It shows that sexuality is flexible; that is the essence of evolution.

Not at all. Flexibility in mode of reproduction is a characteristic of fitness, not evidence of evolution.

Originally posted by Alliance
Not at all. Flexibility in mode of reproduction is a characteristic of fitness, not evidence of evolution.

There is only two sides in this argument; evolution or creationism. It states in the bible that all things are made male and female. A virgin birth is something only done by god. So, why did god give the dragons a virgin birth?

Although I don't want to get in the middle of the argument, this discovery is not evolution because the article states that this every animal (well female actually) or the species has this feature, but the asexuality is only when the males aren't arround.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
There is only two sides in this argument; evolution or creationism. It states in the bible that all things are made male and female. A virgin birth is something only done by god. So, why did god give the dragons a virgin birth?

2. Things give virgin births every day. Nothing really new or exciting. Ever heard of yeast? The Bible is wrong. So what else is new?

3. God didn't give anyone anything. This is just a simple case of you not knowing what evolution is.

Originally posted by Alliance
1. There are not just two sides.

2. Things give virgin births every day. Nothing really new or exciting. Ever heard of yeast? The Bible is wrong. So what else is new?

3. God didn't give anyone anything. This is just a simple case of you not knowing what evolution is.

So, you agree with me.

The article you gave is not about evolution.