Replies

>>Darwinists are anti-creation not pro-science. Evidence means nothing to them in the slightest, especially if it shows that creationists line of thinking appears to be more accurate.<<

There is no such thing as a “Darwinist.” There are those who understand science and attribute the early genesis of what is now The Theory of Evolution to Darwin. Just as there are no “Copernicists” nor “Einsteinists” nor “Curieists.”

As far as creationism having “evidence” — when you introduce me to the corporeal ID and it (or He) tells us how to use what it does every single time in a definable and predictable way, you have just theology.

Your understanding of science is based in the depths of your apologetics and Luddite folklore, not on the actual practice.

Evolution is a hoax, there is no presentable evidence to show a change of form from one morphology to another. Lots of bones, lots of ideas, no factual corroboration. And a problem I think is that people confuse ‘adaptation’ with ‘evolution’. One exists and has been observed, one does not and hasn’t.

While it is expected that those who have no or little belief in God would find this Theory appealing, it is saddening to hear professed Christians supporting it.

You will ndeed someday have your intorduction to the Creator, hope that works out for you.

It is easy for you to call a person of Faith a Luddite....But Science is a great tool. Lots of good, useful things have been discovered. A Creation-believing Christian (which SHOULD be the only kind) is not anti-science. Not at all. Such a person just understands and believes that God has described to us how the world and life began. And a man-made Theory just doesn’t stand up.

"There is no such thing as a “Darwinist.” There are those who understand science and attribute the early genesis of what is now The Theory of Evolution to Darwin."

That is your opinion, but you are mistaken. Darwinists are real, they are in very high positions in science, they unfairly hate creationism passionately, and that hatred has nothing to do with science.

As far as creationism having “evidence”

The origin of all species from one has absolutely no evidence in science whatsoever. How can you believe in it, and then say creationism has no scientific evidence?

"Your understanding of science is based in the depths of your apologetics and Luddite folklore, not on the actual practice."

What part of my beliefs do you consider Luddite folkore? I certainly hope you don't mean the book of Genesis. My understanding of science is based on evidence found using the scientific method, not the delusions of a man who visited an island and saw some birds.

There is no science behind the theory of the origin of all species from one. It is a religious belief held by Darwinists who currently hold science by the throat. When you say you believe in it, your beliefs are based on religion/philosophy and not science.