Three Theories - Where is the Debate
There are three prevailing beliefs in regards to the origin of mankind.
These three beliefs have distinct differences and one very specific similarity - belief in that which is unknown.
The evolutionist observes nature and concludes that all life is subject to change.
The father of evolution was Charles Darwin although he was not the first to consider the possibility of natural selection as a means of altering or morphing one creature into something better.
The positioning of the theory of evolution has to do with microbiology and the belief that changes happened at this level over the course of millions of years.
Evolutionists project backwards and believe that all life may have originated from a single cell organism.
This theory is also the one most often taught in schools at all levels and is rarely allowed to have rivals in the classroom from competing theories.
The second theory is creation.
This theory believes in the biblical (or other sacred texts) accounts indicating the earth was developed by a divine being who had a purpose for mankind and life as we know it has not been subject to long-term species changes.
In essence the belief is that mankind has existed since the inception of the world and does not have other primate ancestors in the distant past.
In this theory a cow has always been a cow, a monkey has always been a monkey and life was established in a manner that placed all creatures on earth at the same time at the direction of God.
The third theory is often associated directly with creation, but it does feature some differences that most creationists would not agree with.
This theory is called intelligent design.
Proponents of this hypothesis suggest that in order for there to be purpose devoid of chaos it is logical to assume that an intelligent being designed life as we know it.
This life could have been developed over a long period of time, but the complexities of life and the sustaining molecules and protein make it virtually impossible for these theorists to assume that humans who have the ability to reason could have simply improved from lesser life forms over a long period of time.
In some cases intelligent design is a theory that is not close enough to either competing theories to allow an absolute kinship of thought.
On the other hand evolutionists are often quick to express their belief that intelligent design and creation are indeed the same theory.
Many creationists would reject both competing theories as well.
The theory of origins is often considered a debate based in either science or religion.
Interestingly creationists would tend to view the debate it terms of creation science or philosophy.
Intelligent design proponents would view themselves as the most likely to find a balance between science and logical conclusions as to earth's origins.
Evolutionists seem to be ardently opposed to any other theory that does not validate their theory and it has become common for evolutionists to insist that there be no public debate of the issue while the predominate view on origins in schools remains evolution.
In the context of education it seems antithetical to encourage freethinking on one hand and then refuse dialogue on theory on the other.
These three beliefs have distinct differences and one very specific similarity - belief in that which is unknown.
The evolutionist observes nature and concludes that all life is subject to change.
The father of evolution was Charles Darwin although he was not the first to consider the possibility of natural selection as a means of altering or morphing one creature into something better.
The positioning of the theory of evolution has to do with microbiology and the belief that changes happened at this level over the course of millions of years.
Evolutionists project backwards and believe that all life may have originated from a single cell organism.
This theory is also the one most often taught in schools at all levels and is rarely allowed to have rivals in the classroom from competing theories.
The second theory is creation.
This theory believes in the biblical (or other sacred texts) accounts indicating the earth was developed by a divine being who had a purpose for mankind and life as we know it has not been subject to long-term species changes.
In essence the belief is that mankind has existed since the inception of the world and does not have other primate ancestors in the distant past.
In this theory a cow has always been a cow, a monkey has always been a monkey and life was established in a manner that placed all creatures on earth at the same time at the direction of God.
The third theory is often associated directly with creation, but it does feature some differences that most creationists would not agree with.
This theory is called intelligent design.
Proponents of this hypothesis suggest that in order for there to be purpose devoid of chaos it is logical to assume that an intelligent being designed life as we know it.
This life could have been developed over a long period of time, but the complexities of life and the sustaining molecules and protein make it virtually impossible for these theorists to assume that humans who have the ability to reason could have simply improved from lesser life forms over a long period of time.
In some cases intelligent design is a theory that is not close enough to either competing theories to allow an absolute kinship of thought.
On the other hand evolutionists are often quick to express their belief that intelligent design and creation are indeed the same theory.
Many creationists would reject both competing theories as well.
The theory of origins is often considered a debate based in either science or religion.
Interestingly creationists would tend to view the debate it terms of creation science or philosophy.
Intelligent design proponents would view themselves as the most likely to find a balance between science and logical conclusions as to earth's origins.
Evolutionists seem to be ardently opposed to any other theory that does not validate their theory and it has become common for evolutionists to insist that there be no public debate of the issue while the predominate view on origins in schools remains evolution.
In the context of education it seems antithetical to encourage freethinking on one hand and then refuse dialogue on theory on the other.
