EVOLUTION VERSUS CREATION - WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE FOR CREATION? Why should anyone accept the arguments of Creationists regarding either science, or creation? The creation industry spends a lot of effort attempting to discredit any field of scientific study which even looks like it might refute their favourite creation myth, but never actually produces any sound research to support their contentions. Do they not realise that even if evolution and its attendant subjects were shown to be wrong, it STILL doesnt make the creationist claims true? It is not a case of science wrong then creation true. Just like a scientist with an hypothesis that must be tested before it becomes a theory, so too must creationists present and properly test their hypothesis before it will be accepted by anyone other than a handful of hardcore fundamentalists with no scientific education to speak of. It is in such a testing that the peculiar ideas of so-called creation science must demonstrate their validity, or be retired from contention. You cannot refute science with faith - because science rests upon conclusions drawn from demonstrable evidence, while creationism rests upon a minority interpretation of an ancient book of mythology. So tell us, you believers in a personal creation just 6000 years ago: Why should we accept your claims when you can provide nothing to support them? Would that not be a seriously irrational thing to do, given the enormous body of evidence that points so strongly AWAY from creation?
Posted on: Mon, 19 May 2014 07:37:44 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015