[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

There is no advantage to believing that evolution created the system. Don't know if your philosophy can handle that or not.

That's just it - evolution is a philosophy, not empirical science. The error that evolutionists make is to confuse the two.

[exDemMom]

That's just it - evolution is a philosophy, not empirical science. The error that evolutionists make is to confuse the two.

Evolution is a theory, not a philosophy.

As such, it provides a framework for the vast body of biological knowledge, and it provides the means by which we can continue to formulate the hypotheses that drive scientific advance.

Echoing the scientific philosopher Karl Popper, Stephen Hawking in A Brief History of Time states, "A theory is a good theory if it satisfies two requirements: It must accurately describe a large class of observations on the basis of a model that contains only a few arbitrary elements, and it must make definite predictions about the results of future observations." He goes on to state, "Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis; you can never prove it. No matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory. On the other hand, you can disprove a theory by finding even a single observation that disagrees with the predictions of the theory." The "unprovable but falsifiable" nature of theories is a necessary consequence of using inductive logic.

According to Stephen Hawking's criteria, evolution is an excellent theory that has stood up to rigorous testing for well over a century.

[GourmetDan]

"That's just it - evolution is a philosophy, not empirical science. The error that evolutionists make is to confuse the two."

Well as "Expelled" showed us, there are financial disincentives as well.