Originally posted by JaTo:No matter how far back we take science, it keeps coming down to a completely unknown "entity" or power that orchestrated everything that we are aware of as space and time.
Astrophysicists have made progress explaining how the universe began since telescopes were invented. The big bang happens to be the current accepted theory given the current body of evidence. The fact that it's not yet an iron-clad hypothesis is not proof that some unknown entity "did it for us." It benefits no one except Creationists themselves to explain away whatever we don't currently know as "the work of God."
Quote: I personally think that it takes more faith to belive in some of the evolution theories that have spouted up (given the impossible odds they toss out) vs. a more practical approach towards hybrid Creationism that does embrace scientific fact.
Combining Creationism with science is "practical" only if you define "practical" as "taking the path of least resistance." Creationism is the opposite of science. Why bother with science at all if you're just going to chalk up every unkown to God?
Quote: One or two abberations in a system is acceptable to my statistical way of thinking; Evolution and how homo sapiens came into existance is based on so bloody many abberations that it's the statistical equivalent of winning the lottery EVERY time you purchase a ticket.
If individual evolutionary steps are taken on their own without examining the story behind why each step represents a milestone, sure, it looks like a leap of logic. But if you consider that we're talking about a period of a billion years, in which time countless organisms tried and failed to evolve, you realize evolution theory is more trial and error than dumb luck. It's not like the individual steps of the evoutionary chain just happened to turn out that way in direct succession.
FWIW I don't pretend to know if the big bang or evolution will turn out to be 100% correct. In fact IMO every scientist should take a critical eye to whatever hypothesis he's working on. But I do know that trying to combine science with Creationism won't get us any closer to an answer.
