... but perhaps not necessarily in this manner, with "embarrassingly" and "fantasy", etc. I prefer a steadfast adherence to the unique status of Darwinian Evolution as a scientific explanation for the Origin of Species.
My doctrine: "Creationism does not offer a scientific alternative to Evolution."
why would creationism find a need to define what no one truly understands?
let the evolutionist float inane non theories....
one need not theorize about alleged CHANCE evolution
Creation dates back to....DAY ZERO.....
as nothing..... from nothing leaves nothing...ALWAYS...everything did not SPRING FORTH from NOTHING
Perhaps, but evolution (the theory) itself is not scientific.