[whattajoke]

What part of “Theory” does this pseudo-scientific jerk not understand? When there is not enough evidence to make a theory a law, the truly bright amongst us will seek out other alternatives.

Please provide an example of a Law in science. Extra points if it is biological in nature.

Please provide the scientific definition of "Theory" and your comments forthwith.

I'm curious as to what your "alternative" (specifically to evolution) entails.

Lastly, have you any other "alternatives" to currently accepted scientific theories? (For example, fellow creationist and FReeper GourmetDan believes in a geocentric solar system.)

All creationists are invited to participate, of course.

[ColdWater]

Please provide an example of a Law in science. Extra points if it is biological in nature.

The wealth of the lawyers is exponentially related to the number of laws they enact.

[Dionysius]

Law as in the “Law of Gravity”.

Theory is a postulation that has been verified to some degree. It does not rise to a Law because there are elements yet to be explained (like the evolution of the eye).

This is the totality of your supercilious little quiz I intend on taking. If my answers are not pointy-headed enough for you, I’m sure I’ll hear about.

I believe in Intelligent Design, which is as incapable of absolute proof as Evolution. And I have yet to see it disproved scientifically. Even Einstein conceded that the complexity of the Universe implied the hand of a higher intellect.

My faith in God drives my belief system, not an atheistic, begging-the-question agenda desparately contriving, to no avail, to disprove God’s existence.

I shall not cravenly apologize for this or accept the “theory” that it is symptomatic of a degraded intellect.

[Dionysius]

Law as in the “Law of Gravity”.

Theory is a postulation that has been verified to some degree. It does not rise to a Law because there are elements yet to be explained (like the evolution of the eye).

This is the totality of your supercilious little quiz I intend on taking. If my answers are not pointy-headed enough for you, I’m sure I’ll hear about.

I believe in Intelligent Design, which is as incapable of absolute proof as Evolution. And I have yet to see it disproved scientifically. Even Einstein conceded that the complexity of the Universe implied the hand of a higher intellect.

My faith in God drives my belief system, not an atheistic, begging-the-question agenda desparately contriving, to no avail, to disprove God’s existence.

I shall not cravenly apologize for this or accept the “theory” that it is symptomatic of a degraded intellect.