I must have missed the part of the article that showed any empirical evidence supporting “creation science”
GGG- please explain what empirical data you have to support your assertion in posting this article?
I must have missed your posting on the 101 reasons for a young earth!
You simply must read it - it is most telling the way the evolutionists decided to pick just one point to nit pick and decry the whole article. You and your ilk are so ingenious.
/s
no wait
/triple dog sarc...
What the heck are you talking about? Posting an article requires no assertion. There may exist implications or reasons but no assertion of anything is required. Besides that, complain to the "Telegraph" if you don't like their title. The comment in parentheses after the title is an expression of exactly what happens in the article.