Originally posted by sonhouse
But of course if the stated results supported creationism, then it would have been brilliant science and recommendations gone straight to the Nobel prize committee, right?
Here's the funny thing, sonhouse.
Both camps are fighting for the same thing: who gets to determine what people believe... at least, as it relates to origins.
That makes me wonder: who cares?
Think about it for a minute. Why should anyone care about how life started, how we got to where we are?
Why does the Bible start with origins?
How can it possibly matter how life was formed?
For the Christian, the Bible offers a vision of strength, of power. The God who creates is all powerful, puts the whole thing in motion and is capable of saving us from the black darkness of death when it's all over.
For the atheist, evolution offers a picture of complete and utter chance. This chance leads to further confluences of events, including all the vagaries of life, joys and sorrows and everything in between. And then it ends in the black darkness of death and is truly all over.
In the former, while the origins are comforting, they are not necessary for salvation.
In the latter, while the origins offer no comfort, they are absolutely critical for acceptance into the fold.
In both cases, the chance of knowing with even a remote level of certainty what actually happened is so close to zero as to render the exercise useless.
In both cases, even what we hold to be true has near to zero impact on anything we think or do otherwise in our daily lives. Sure, the Christian can argue how knowing God created the universe can offer a tremendous amount of succor for his daily applications and needs, just as the atheist can argue how the nature of chance which led to our existence is the justification for any number of life perspectives. But at the end of the day, we all still pretty much behave in a manner of baseline decency.
Kinda weird, if you think about it.