Dude, sorry if that sounded harsh, but I've had way too many people conflate science and religion who simply don't know the first thing about the science with which their disagreeing. They are two different things, and they conflict only because religion refuses to accept anything that might interfere with its preconceived notions, then tries to use spurious logic to confuse the issue.
For example: "I suppose my biggest issue with regarding Evolution as truth is that our understanding of it is constantly changing."
Um... Dude, that's the entire point of science--To gain a better and better understanding of how things work. Our understanding of every field keeps changing. Look at physics. We've gone from the Greek philosophers to Newton to Maxwell's wave theories to Einstein to quantum physics to M theory. But since out understanding of physics is always changing, should we just say, "Well, no--If we don't have a perfect understanding of it and keep making new discoveries, let's forget it and say that gravity is little invisible angels pushing everything down to the ground?"
There is evidence for evolution. There is no evidence for ID (which is actually creationism repackaged--it was introduced with the exact same documents as creationism after a "search and replace"). This is not to say that ID can't be correct--It just isn't science, and there isn't a shred of evidence for it. It is a belief system. If there IS an intelligent designer (which I'm not ruling out), that intelligent designer apparently used evolution to create life forms. (This is the official stance of the Catholic church.) If there is an intelligent designer, who the hell are any of us to limit his, her, or its methods?
Again, if reality screws up your belief system, you're best off changing your belief system instead of trying to make reality conform.
Sorry if that sounded harsh...
Dude, sorry if that sounded harsh, but I've had way too many people conflate science and religion who simply don't know the first thing about the science with which their disagreeing. They are two different things, and they conflict only because religion refuses to accept anything that might interfere with its preconceived notions, then tries to use spurious logic to confuse the issue.
For example: "I suppose my biggest issue with regarding Evolution as truth is that our understanding of it is constantly changing."
Um... Dude, that's the entire point of science--To gain a better and better understanding of how things work. Our understanding of every field keeps changing. Look at physics. We've gone from the Greek philosophers to Newton to Maxwell's wave theories to Einstein to quantum physics to M theory. But since out understanding of physics is always changing, should we just say, "Well, no--If we don't have a perfect understanding of it and keep making new discoveries, let's forget it and say that gravity is little invisible angels pushing everything down to the ground?"
There is evidence for evolution. There is no evidence for ID (which is actually creationism repackaged--it was introduced with the exact same documents as creationism after a "search and replace"). This is not to say that ID can't be correct--It just isn't science, and there isn't a shred of evidence for it. It is a belief system. If there IS an intelligent designer (which I'm not ruling out), that intelligent designer apparently used evolution to create life forms. (This is the official stance of the Catholic church.) If there is an intelligent designer, who the hell are any of us to limit his, her, or its methods?
Again, if reality screws up your belief system, you're best off changing your belief system instead of trying to make reality conform.