Im New here. Evolutionist or Creationist site?

Over the years I've found one great fault of posters overconfidence in known science. Nothing that exists could exist: unless something first existed; to become what is now. The first of all: must be; existence. Evolution and mutation could be part of a design . LOL ok... Back to the first point:Nothing that does have being ‘can’ have being: without first being a part of a greater body-- until you get to that something That was first--for everything that is now; to ‘exist’ at all.Was the first energy conscious? No one knows. And that is the argument here with creation and evolution. Evolutionist prefer to say NO and a creationists prefer to say YES My personal position is that it is more potential to be YES :because; order denotes intelligence as a necessity for today’s evolving universe to change from an indeterminable but apparently singular start. (The first of all to exist, Which had to ‘always be’, before anything else could be; namely: Existence.)The scientific opinions are that there was no creator because there is no scientific proof or evidence to show he cares about ‘man’; therefore he does not exist.But from your post, and others, the Initial poster can only conclude that the majority here are evolutionists, and creationists have an uphill battle to even communicate for real answers.However, from my post they can conclude that both arguments are simply subjective beliefs being argued, and it is a chance for the poster to come to a decision concerning their own beliefs by debating here.Edited by tesla, : sentence edit

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

I don't know. Depends who you ask. I'd agree with you on most of that. Emergence of species I'm undecided. It's still guessing. Energy as we know it lacks the cellular structure needed for the neurons that are required for consciousness to exist We do not understand consciousness well enough to determine that. Trees communicate via chemical signatures to tell others of its species how to ward off sickness.There could be other life besides carbon based. LOL Who knows? You got me on wording

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

Those creation sermons have been taught and heavily studied first before all things--in any depth--and is a common belief of most.People want to know the truth, and on some level they trust science. unless science is selling another tooth fairy bullshit religion like any other religion being practiced, I want more cooperation in discovering that truth.Call it science call it church; call it a figment of your imagination. 75% or more of the planet think it’s the most important thing to life. So either sell us honesty or admit you’re just another bullshit religion with no real answers.Edited by tesla, : word structure.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

Some of the greatest acts and most horrible things have been done in the name of God. It has united peoples, it has split them. It has been attributed to the birth of children. And it has been attributed to the greatest catastrophes. It was in keeping record of this that language became important. It has been one of the most important factors in the progression of the human race.When the time of death is on a man, his mind goes straight to God.It is there when your lonely, and to the desperate who have nowhere else to go.Now what has science done that is greater than this?A microwave oven? cars? Gameboy? Didn’t our ancestors laugh and cry? Win and lose? Dream in life?They did not have that stuff.So what does science have to offer for this?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

So what does science have to offer for this?The answer is subjective.But objectively examine the situation. Science needs funding to improve knowledge. Religion needs funding to be taught.Where are people going to spend their money?You have to research What the people are buying. If you want to sell your science you need to be attempting to answer The [answers to] questions that people are paying for. And knowledge of God gets top dollar.You cannot research the distant galaxies with any effectiveness if you do not even know what the sun or moon is.So you can't just "look for God" until you first understand the ‘basics’ of the basic Human.Cognitive function is recorded and sent in the brain, so what does it take to decipher how it works?I say: here's a starting point" you say that’s not supernatural.If you find a way to further true knowledge, be honest with what we do know and don't know . But tell the people you want to research the brain in hopes of discovering consciousness and God. With real science. Discovering real things. and not closing your mind that God may exist, and it would probably be funded.There is no more evidence for dark matter than there is for God scientifically. But we are learning things by investigating potentials.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

I did answer it. I told you it's subjective.So my answer is subjective. It's my answer. what is yours?

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides