The debate still exists whether Darwinism or creationism is true even we know lots of facts about the evolution. This debate can be put ...
The debate still exists whether Darwinism or creationism is true even we know lots of facts about the evolution. This debate can be put parallel with an example of how a car works.
If we know the cars only as seeing how they are running on the street, we can create different theories about how they work. We can have a theory that they have an engine to drive them or we can have a theory that an invisible person pushing them from behind as well as many other theories can be created how the cars work.
And later we can go to a car factory, and we can examine the new cars closely. We can see its structure, how it's built. Now we can select our theories about how cars work. Still, we can keep the invisible person pushing the theory, but the theory of the engine which drives the car is much more likely because we can see the engine and the whole structure and it fits the driving engine theory.
This is where we are now in the Darwinism vs. creationism platform. Our car capable of running without pushing by an invisible man. We can't deny it entirely because we didn't start the car yet, but it remains an implausible theory, because now we can see the structure of a car, we can see the engine and other parts.
Yes, we didn't start the car yet. But if our engine theory is valid and even if we could start a car, that would be the ultimate proof of our theory. Can we start a car?
No comments