Just because something disagrees with your particular Yabba Dabba Do Creationism, doesn't mean it is anti-God.
The tree of life, some want to call the shrub of life due to rampant gene transfer, especially early on; whatever.
Most of the genome has no known function. “Junk” is in the context of “junk you keep up in the attic”, not “garbage that you throw out”. From the beginning it was suggested that it was DNA of potential use; but STILL - NO KNOWN FUNCTION.
The fossil record is in no way consistent with dinosaurs and humans living contemporaneously all within the last six or so thousand years. That is fantasy.
How would a creationist go about demonstrating that DNA is a complex digital code, when creationists do not do any actual science with DNA? Biologists demonstrated that DNA is a complex digital code. Creationists don't create science, they create scientific “critique”.
And as a necessity, they need to misrepresent, and NOW I am beginning to understand, and NOT KNOW any biology.
Thus the reluctance of the ‘forces of Creation’ here on FR to actually LEARN anything AT ALL about the subject they discuss day after day after day.
Rather pitiful.
“Thus the reluctance of the ‘forces of Creation’ here on FR to actually LEARN anything AT ALL about the subject...”
There are no ‘forces of Creation’ on FR, just small-minded bigots of weak faith with no real power at all.
LOL...way to try and explain away evolution’s GIGANTIC failures. Creationists said that what the evos assumed was “junk” would prove functional. Evos wrong, creationists right, as per usual. The evos predicted darwood’s so-called ‘tree of life’, creationists predicted a ‘forest’ or ‘orchard’ of life. Creationists were proven correct, the evos were dead wrong, as per usual. Creationists point out that the only empirically verifiable source of the complex, specified, digital codes (such as DNA) is intelligent designers. The evos bury their collective heads in the sand. Par for the course. Many more examples could be given.