Replies

Could you fly if you didn't understand how aerodynamics work? You of all people should know how important the underlying foundations are. Even a pilot of a small craft needs to understand physics.
Creationism in biology is the same as telling pilots that a plane flies because God holds it up.

To you it is. There are others in science who see the handiwork of a designer because evolutionists have failed to conclude many issues. They can neither prove how the single cell came about even though it is highly developed and complex nor can ansewer how or why the eye formed, according to them life started without eyes, why did it have to develope if there was not the need? Maybe by design things could see? Nahh, thats mythology.

Sure we understand vast amounts but if your going to speak to foundations then start by having one to stand on. And I do not mean that to say that all of science supporting Evolution is junk, thats not it at all. But the chance that it relies on in all honesty is as good as what you claim of Creationists. Were not just saying "believe just because."

You clearly haven't been following my threads.

That ALL of the natural world is God's handiwork should be clear to all but the most jaded atheist. But He exists well outside of what we call science and scientific examination.

My point is that ID and, perhaps, creationism should be argued in philosophy and similar arenas. NOT science. Certainly not biology and the other similar studies.

All science has "holes." Gravity has holes. Physics has massive holes (look at String Theory). Evolution no more needs to apologize for the holes than traditional physicists had to apologize for the standard theory of gravity getting a black eye by Einstein.

Eyes didn't just come into existence in one day. The process was very, very slow as the prerequisites for vision and the external stimulus needed for it slowly came about. That is why there is no vision in the deep, deep ocean. There was no evolutionary need for it.

The exceptions which we can see prove the rule.