Replies

That’s fine, I’m not arguing that point. I’m arguing the point that *I* simplified the statement because most people here don’t want to bother to actually READ and UNDERSTAND science.

As far as “fallacy of evolutionism” — how do you know it is false? Are you basing your entire premise on the Bible and the first line of the Bible, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”

If so.... you’re basing what you know entirely on a belief system which you’ve chosen. Who is to say you’re right and the evolutionists are incorrect?

The difference IS simple. Creationism is based solely on BELIEF with nothing but the word of God upon which to base those beliefs.

Evolution at least has some basis in scientific FACTS. That an Evolutionist wishes to belief his/her own idealism, and DISBELIEVE someone else’s is their problem, not mine.

So, don’t sit there and tell me about “fallacies” in scientific studies when there’s absolute NO evidence whatsoever that God did what the Bible says he did - without something other than Faith Alone to back you up.

The difference IS simple. Creationism is based solely on BELIEF with nothing but the word of God upon which to base those beliefs.

Evolution at least has some basis in scientific FACTS. That an Evolutionist wishes to belief his/her own idealism, and DISBELIEVE someone else’s is their problem, not mine.

Actually, both are based solely on BELIEF and the FACTS can be interpreted to support either BELIEF system. If you like, please share your favorite scientific FACT that is a basis for evolution.

Let's see...hmmmmm....using all available advanced technology and intellect, scientists spend years trying to synthesize life in the simplest and most primitive form. Yet a mindless force (evolution) haphazardly stumbles upon creating a virtually endless variety of complex life on earth without the aid of intellect or technology. Makes perfect sense to me.

The science of evolution is not unlike that of global warming. Someone gets the ball rolling by positing an intriguing but false premise and everyone starts to jump on the bandwagon, continuously making new 'discoveries' that further support the premise.

When a creation scientist such as Behe proposes a theory such as irreducible complexity, he is scoffed at by the 'enlightened' scientific community in much the same way as "Global Warming Deniers" are ridiculed.

Evolution is accepted as not a theory, but as fact. It is taught as such from grammar school through college. Why? Well, gee wiz, there are scientific 'facts' to support it.

Global warming is also treated as fact. It too has scientific 'facts' supporting it. In fact, the supporting evidence is so overwhelming, that the federal and state governments, with the utmost urgency, are making liberty-robbing laws to remedy it.

With all the supporting scientific evidence, do you believe in man-made global warming? I mean, could the science be possibly wrong?