[TheWormster]

Creationism is *not* a theory.

Two men see a working clock, nailed to a tree in the forest. One man theorizes, "perhaps someone put it there." Another says, "that is not a scientific theory! I won't even discuss it! It doesn't qualify!"

That's the road you are trodding...


--

Piss poor analogy. We KNOW clocks are created. We know who created them. We have seen them be created. We know how they are created. Thus, when we see an object that we already KNOW is created, we can assume that it was probably placed there.

[farmer18th]

Piss poor analogy. We KNOW clocks are created.

Not at all. My two peasants had never seen one before, just as Marco Polo had never seen gun powder before he visited China. He didn't assume that if "evolved" from mud, did he?

The orthodox faith of evolutionists is indeed a profound and frightening thing.

[Blzbba]

"Piss poor analogy. We KNOW clocks are created. We know who created them. We have seen them be created. We know how they are created. Thus, when we see an object that we already KNOW is created, we can assume that it was probably placed there."


Yeah, but what if I write in a book that a Magic Man with Magic Powers actually put the clock there over a period of 7 days and it was good?

THEN, my 'theory' becomes INDISPUTABLE. Why? Because my 'theory' is now in a book and I can just claim to have been 'inspired by God' when I wrote the book. With that, all other "scientific theories' are invalid and my 'theory' should be forced onto all children. Anyone who disagrees is an evil, godless heathen who'll burn in hell!!