The creationists usually win in the audience's opinion because while the "evo" is trying to talk science the creationist is running circles around him with crowd-pleasing rhetoric and off-topic logical fallacies. This is why Kent Hovind, while loving free-form public debates with his opponents, refuses highly structured or written debates.
You got it. Teleology in science is the ultimate logical fallacy. Very like predestination. If it happens, it was God's will. Why? Because it happened!
Here's to hoping that the 'evos' keep telling each other that (and believing it).
Kent Hovind was not one that I had in mind, there are many others that are much more qualified.
Two evo’s set out to determine what the statistical probability of spontaneous generation of life and then develop into the life we have today, it was 1x10 to 140th power, not good odds.
Recently on PBS there was a discussion that life came from space rocks that hit earth. I thought they were so cocksure it came from primordial slime.
Evolution as has been portrayed has serious problems at best.
Maybe we are a virtual reality game by a very intelligent being and the plug is about to be pulled for lack of interest.
I do not understand why we just don’t bring on the debate that gives both sides adequate and fair opportunity to present their case.
Creation is not a fallacy. The Bible teaches it.