Quote Originally Posted by -0- D i o r -0- View Post
Oh, I conceptually understand it 100%, I'm taking a class mostly based on it, my problem with it is:

A. First of all, there's no way to prove God(s) aren't real.

B. At that point, you can't disprove any creation myth.

This combined with the way I've been treated by many Atheists and the things I see them say drives me away from agreeing with any evolution theory. When they say it's fact, I laugh. The "scientific community" has been around for no more than 200 years. (And that's being generous) In 200 years many new things can be discovered. So I don't think it's fair to simply say, "Oh, sorry, you're religion that's been around for millennia isn't valid."
I'm sorry, but you just can't take that post seriously. Firstly, evolution is in no way affiliated with religion. You should stop right there. They're not mutually exclusive, so the fact that you can't disprove a God or religion (by definition you can't disprove religion, that's why it's such an intelligent construct), in no way invalidates a scientific theory.

Secondly, if I postulate that deep in space there is a flying spaghetti monster, and ask you to disprove it, what do you thinks going to happen? Obviously you can't. The consequence of your inability to disprove that has no bearing on religion or evolution or anything else.

Also, yes you can disprove creation. Traditional creationists believe the earth is roughly only 6,000 years old. It doesn't take a PHD in astrophysics or paleontology to show just how wrong that belief is. And, if you choose to dispute that, than your argument isn't with evolution, but with science as a whole, and if that's a case that's deeply troubling. A scientist will never came out and say something is fact with 100% certainty. That's a violation of a core scientific principle. I suggest you read in to the standard scientific process a bit more.

Also, science has predated all of the modern religions. To say the scientific community is only 200 years old is ridiculous. If you're using age as a large determinant for a religion's validity, why then are your beliefs any more sound than beliefs that predate it?