Hey Junior, none are so blind....
The statement is so eggregiously wrong, I'm surprised you choose to argue it.
If creationism is science, you should be able to answer these questions:
What is creationism?
Many people find that the most important part of a theory is a clear description of what the theory says and does not say.
(1) Give a comprehensive statement of creationism. (There are questions below about conventional science, so please restrict your discussion here to the positive aspects of creationism.) This is the one question of over-reaching importance, so much so that you might consider many of the following questions merely asking for certain details of what makes up a comprehensive statement of creationism. It should be noted that many people prefer quantitative details where appropriate.
It is often a great help to communication if each party understands what the other means by certain critical expressions.
(2) Define technical terms and other words or expressions that are likely to be misunderstood.
(3) Include the evidence for creationism (please remember that merely finding problems with conventional science does not count as support for creationism, as there may be other theories which differ from both conventional science and creationism). A good example of evidence for creationism would be some observation which was predicted by it. That is much better support than merely giving an explanation for observations which were known before it was formulated. Far less convincing is evidence which has an alternative explanation.
In order to decide between conflicting theories, it is important that not only must the conflicting theories be well described, and that the evidence supporting the conflicting theories be proposed, but also that there be established some rules for deciding between the theories and evaluating the evidence.
(4) Can you suggest principles for so deciding and evaluating?
There are many alternatives to creationism. Some of the alternatives are: theistic evolution and old-earth creationism.
(5) Distinguish your theory of creationism from some of these alternatives and give some reasons for it rather than the others.
Many people find a theory which is open to change in the face of new evidence much more satisfying than one which is inflexible.
(6) Describe features of creationism which are subject to modification. Another way of phrasing it is: is there any kind of observation which, if it were seen, would change creationism? Is it open to change, and if so, what criteria are there for accepting change?
Exposition of creationism.
Definitions of terms.
Evidence for creationism.
Rules of evidence.
Distinguishing characteristics of creationism.
Evidence which modifies creationism.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/stumpers.html
You assert the statement's wrong, but you don't back up that assertion, but simply handwave it away. Give evidence the assertion is wrong. I've already shown you the evidence the assertion is right. Either you have something or you don't, so either put up, or shut up.
Just like the Demonrats.
John J Grebe
http://www.plasticshalloffame.com/articles.php?articleId=63
| Made important contributions to the plastics industry, including the development of polystyrene, Styrofoam, and Saran plastics. Grebe personally held 64 patents at Dow Chemical Co. in electro-chemistry, power generation, synthesis of organic compounds, and air conditioning. He was honored with the Hyatt Award for his work on the production of pure styrene and its polymerization. For the federal government, Grebe designed atomic reactors for submarines. Grebe joined Dow in 1921 -- immediately after receiving his BS degree in physics from the Case School of Applied Science -- and remained with the company for 41 years. In addition to his work as the founder and director of the Dow Physical Research Laboratory, he was a pioneer scientist in the field of nuclear and chemical research. He also made major contributions in the simplification of plastics processing and automatic control equipment. |
http://www.dow.com/dow_news/speeches/20011017_spe_stav.htm
Following in Dr. Dow's footsteps was another key scientist, John Grebe. He focused on converting batch processes to continuous processes – a major breakthrough leading to low-cost production – making possible the broad use of chemicals and plastics.
Grebe also hired Dow's first woman chemist, Sylvia Stoesser. The inhibitor she helped develop led to the successful commercialization of high-quality styrene and polystyrene.
One of Grebe's associates was Ralph Wiley, who in the 1930s made a chance discovery that led to the development of the SARAN family of plastic resins.
People like Dow, Grebe, Stoesser, Wiley, and their counterparts essentially made Dow Chemical.
Grebe was a creationist.