Actually "creationism" science has nothing to do with "bible lessons" or religion at all, it's only numskull Evo's who think it does.
Science is science, that's all it is.
Science provides more "young earth" proofs while "evolution" theories are sadly lacking any at all.
>>Actually “creationism” science has nothing to do with “bible lessons” or religion at all, it’s only numskull Evo’s who think it does.
There is no such thing as “creation science.” Maybe you don’t know what science is? Insults, such as “numskull,” although they give you a childlike thrill, don’t do much to help your argument.
>>Science is science, that’s all it is.
Yes, and you clearly don’t know what it is, how it works, its tolls nor its uses. You probably STILL don’t know what a “scientific theory” is, although you have been told more than a few times.
>>Science provides more “young earth” proofs while “evolution” theories are sadly lacking any at all.
Waiting for that first scientific proof. Using proper science tools, not conjecture and philosophy.
You can start with galaxies observed to be billions of light years away and formations to be billions of years old.
AFTER you provide the rest of the scientists’ names AND their life science qualifications.