Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: stuartcr
Why not just accept that they are both...theories, and not proven fact?

That is my position.

195 posted on 05/12/2003 11:10:59 AM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies ]


To: Last Visible Dog
Good, that makes at least 2 of us that are realistic.
198 posted on 05/12/2003 11:14:24 AM PDT by stuartcr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies ]

To: Last Visible Dog
[Why not just accept that they are both...theories, and not proven fact?] That is my position.

But creationism is most definitely NOT a scientific theory. A scientific theory is a rational, comprehensible, cause-and-effect explanation (or model) for verifiable facts. Further, a scientific theory must be falsifiable, which can happen by observing verifiable facts which contradict it. Creationism fails to be a scientific theory in absolutely every respect. It's an article of faith, which is fine with me, but that's not science.

204 posted on 05/12/2003 11:18:47 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson