"EDIT : I reread , and it seems you are correct . Creationism isnÂ ’ t a theory at all ! On one of my most generous days , I might call it a set of poor hypotheses . It really should be classified as a myth While it is true that science and religion are not generally compatible , because science is based on evidence supporting a hypothesis , which will eventually become a theory after significant support , and a law after virtually proven true ( but never actually proven ) , while religion is a series of stories to try to explain the universe in the simplest way possible ( god did it ) . Science is meant to expand and change over time until the theory of everything is reached . Religion assumes they already have that theory ( god did it ) . Evolution is no mo0re anti-religion than science itself , except that the conflict manifests itself here ."
"So if a story in the bible is proven to be true , like the fact that there is enough water in the ice caps , and the atmosphere to cover the highest mountains , then these `` myths `` would become less rediculous ? Or would there be a logical explanation other than a higher life form did it ? Mayabe a crazy man built a big boat at the right time and happened to have two of each animal at the time ? But that would be crazy talk . Wouldnt it ?"
"I reread , and it seems you are correct . Creationism isnÂ ’ t a theory at all ! On one of my most generous days , I might call it a set of poor hypotheses . It really should be classified as a myth While it is true that science and religion are not generally compatible"
"So if a story in the bible is proven to be true , like the fact that there is enough water in the ice caps , and the atmosphere to cover the highest mountains , then these `` myths `` would become less rediculous ?"