[LogicWings]

I suppose some creationists do this.

All creatioinists, by definition, attempt to prove the unprovable, by definition. It is in the very construction of the idea of creationism.

I'm sure there are reasons for fools and that fools reason.

I'm sure you don't really understand reason then.

You'd have to use your imagination! If metaphysics and irrational mental exercises are foolishness to you, though, even for the purposes of becoming well-reasoned, you probably won't be interested.

You're right, I'm not. This is a straw man argument. Imagination has its function, but doesn't 'prove' anything. You conflate metaphysics and irrational mental 'exercises' with actual science and scientific claims, as if they were equally valid.

Reminds me of the anti-war ninnies that claim moral equivalence between Bush and Saddam. Like those idiots who claim Bush is a 'dictator.' There is no 'reason' I should take such ideas seriously.

[unspun]

"Outbreaks of metaphysics are not allowed!"
"Stop that! Stop that now!"
"We do not grant liberty for this silliness!"
"You have been warned!"

Colonel Objectivist

[unspun]

LW, what would you have done, if you had been in the upper room with the disciples and Jesus walked in through the wall and explained how he created everything, and then he started to demonstrate it for you in a test environment. Would that destroy your faith in Him?

Last peek(?) ping to the two Ladies, from this knave who would be of your court.

[TaxRelief]

Listen, Archie, you may be able to generate logic faster than any guy this side of the continental divide, but it is equally important to be able to communicate ideas effectively. Good communication starts with a good vocabulary. Congratulations on the brave attempt to use the word "conflate": the meaning is correct but the tone is incorrect. "Conflate" is a passive not an active verb. He actually "integrates" science and metaphysics, et al. By the way, it is interesting to see you "conflate" science and scientific claims.