Originally posted by Hank
Can you give me a hint which scientist is a creationist?
Scientists at Answers in Genesis
Scientists in the Biological Sciences at the ICR
Scientists in the Physical Sciences at the ICR
Originally posted by Hank
Before you answer, science makes a theory and goes out into the world and tests a theory. If it can be proven the theory stays.
Do you know what Evolution is based on? I am copying this information from the following website:
The Evolutin of a Creationist
Writing as an evolutionist, G. A. Kerkut lists the major assumptions of evolution. These are the basic theories an evolutionist "takes for granted" or "supposes" to be true. All of the "molecules-to-man science" is built upon these assumptions, but you rarely, if ever, see them listed in a high school or college textbook.
1. The first assumption is that non-living things gave rise to living material, i.e., spontaneous generation occurred.
2. The second assumption is that spontaneous generation occurred only once.
3. The third assumption is that viruses, bacteria, plants and animals are all related.
4. The fourth assumption is that protozoa (single-celled life forms) gave rise to metazoa (multiple-celled life forms).
5. The fifth assumption is that various invertebrate phyla are interrelated.
6. The sixth assumption is that the invertebrates gave rise to the vertebrates.
7. The seventh assumption is that within the vertebrates the fish gave rise to amphibia, the amphibia to reptiles and the reptiles to birds and mammals.
So, tell me again when a theory stays and when it goes?? Evolution has built its theory on ALL of these UNPROVEN assumptions.
Creationists only have 2 assumptions - there is a God and He has revealed himself in the Bible.
Originally posted by Hank
They do not have theories.
Of course they do! Here are some that directly conflict with Evolution. It is taken from the same website above.
The Bible states/we can theorize:
God is the creator of all things.
World created in six literal days (Genesis 1).
Ocean before land (Genesis 1:2).
Atmosphere between two hydrospheres (Genesis 1:7).
First life on land (Genesis 1:11).
First life was land plants (Genesis 1:11).
Earth before sun and stars (Genesis 1:14-19).
All stars made on the fourth day (Genesis 1:16)
Birds and fishes created on the fifth day (Genesis 1:20, 21).
Birds before insects (Genesis 1:20, 21).
Whales before reptiles (Genesis 1:20-31).
Birds before reptiles (Genesis 1:20-31).
Man before woman (Genesis 2:21-22).
Light before the sun (Genesis 1:3-19).
Plants before the sun (Genesis 1:11-19).
Abundance and variety of marine life all at once (Genesis 1:20, 21).
Man exercised dominion over all organisms (Genesis 1:28).
Man's sin the cause of death (Romans 5:12).
Evolution theorizes:
Natural chance processes can account for the existence of all things.
World evolved over eons.
Land before oceans.
Contiguous atmosphere and hydrosphere.
Life began in the oceans.
Marine organisms evolved first.
Sun and stars before earth.
Stars evolved at various times.
Fishes evolved hundreds of millions of years before birds appeared.
Insects before birds.
Reptiles before whales.
Reptiles before birds.
Woman before man (by genetics).
Sun before any light.
Sun before any plants.
Marine life gradually developed from a primitive organic blob.
Most organisms extinct before man existed.
Struggle and death existent long before the evolution of man.
Originally posted by Hank
Their premise is that the Bible is fact. Since they do not have an option to dismiss any portion of the Bible, they are stuck. Not sure how to phrase that, but you can not be a scientist and a creationist at the same time, unless you are open to dismiss part or all of the Bible as facts.
I can accuse Evolutionists of the same thing - they are NOT open to dismiss part or all of their theory. That's why they won't let Creationism or Intelligent Design or anything else EXCEPT Evolution be taught in schools.
I think what you are trying to say is that Creationists come with some presuppositions and Evolutionist don't. Which is NOT true.
Do you know what naturalism is? It is an axiom of Evolutionists that seek 'to explain the universe purely in terms of observed or testable natural mechanisms.'
ANY believer in a higher power (not just Christians) should already have a problem with this presupposition right then and there. And the reason is that a higher power is not bound by what they have created and therefore, cannot be pulled down into a lab and made to go through the hoops of being qualified, quantified, and proven.
Therefore, Evolutionists, in dealing with raw data, will NEVER (no matter how much evidence points to the contrary) conclude of a higher power because their axiom PREVENTS them from doing so. They don't sound so 'objective' to me.
Last page of a Scientific American article admitting to naturalism
