Evidence for Creation

[JohnR7]

Evolution is narrow in it's scope, because it only covers the species. I have been told it has more to do with biology.

All the evidence they use for evoluion, is actually evidence for creation. Only creation covers the entire physical universe that we can see. So, of course there is more actual evidence for creation, then for evolution, because creation covers a lot more area than evolution attempts to explain.

Evolution is a theory for how the different species interact with the natural world we live in. Yet evolutionary theory never really attempts to explain where the natural world came from.

We know that in the beginning was God, and that all things, seen and unseen were created by God. Even God created man, and He gave man more understanding than all the rest of His creation.

 

[Jet Black]

lots of empty handwaving. where is the evidence for creation?

 

[armed2010]

I thought this was an "evidence for creation" thread, not a "watch john make empty claims" thread.

 

[Douglaangu]

Evolution is narrow in it's scope, because it only covers the species. I have been told it has more to do with biology.

Modern biology is pretty much founded on evolution.

All the evidence they use for evoluion, is actually evidence for creation. Only creation covers the entire physical universe that we can see. So, of course there is more actual evidence for creation, then for evolution, because creation covers a lot more area than evolution attempts to explain.

Lets widen the scope of this then shall we? Science can, with extreme detail, almost every thing in the observable universe.
Creation can explain everything in the observable universe extremely simply. "Goddidit".

Evolution is a theory for how the different species interact with the natural world we live in. Yet evolutionary theory never really attempts to explain where the natural world came from.

Because it doesnt need to.
Evolution isnt the be-all-end-all of science. There are other fields you know.

We know that in the beginning was God, and that all things, seen and unseen were created by God. Even God created man, and He gave man more understanding than all the rest of His creation.

Sorry John, that aint science.

 

[Arikay]

So, where is the evidence again?

 

[Data]

Hmm, I was hoping for some evidence.

Misleading title.

 

[Douglaangu]

I wouldn't count on getting much more out of John in this thread.
He's played his trump card early, which amounts to "The entire universe and everything in it is evidence for creationism."

And since we can't top that, he's finished here.

 

[JohnR7]

lots of empty handwaving. where is the evidence for creation?

Right in front of your nose. But you have to open your eyes. You can not close your eyes and than ask: Where is the evidence?

 

[JohnR7]

I thought this was an "evidence for creation" thread, not a "watch john make empty claims" thread.

I thought it was a thread on creation, not a "let's attack John" thread.

 

[Data]

Right in front of your nose. But you have to open your eyes. You can not close your eyes and than ask: Where is the evidence?

My eyes are quite open. In your original post you didn't produce any evidence, or even tried for that matter. Or am I missing something? Enlighten me.

 

[JohnR7]

So, where is the evidence again?

It is the exact same evidence. The real evidence, the natural record supports creation, not evolution. I appreciate you evolutionists doing the dirty work of digging it all up for us though.

 

[Douglaangu]

*sigh*
I'll make this easy for you.
Tell us how God created the earth, then give a detailed explaination of the mechanisms involved. Then give examples of where said mechanisms are demontrated.

 

[Jet Black]

Right in front of your nose. But you have to open your eyes. You can not close your eyes and than ask: Where is the evidence?

woohoo!!!! I just won a bet for €10,000 that you would say that.







shame it was a bet with myself though

 

[Jet Black]

right, I am ignoring this thread now unless someone says something interested. I am not interested in feeding such obvious trollishness
DNFTT.

 

[Philosoft]

Funny creationist doublespeak:

"The sheer diversity of life is proof of a creator. Only God is so creative."

"Well, all forms of life on earth do have a common genetic base."

"Aha, a common trait is proof of a common designer."

Any wonder why we call this stuff unfalsifiable blather?

 

[ObbiQuiet]

(this is meant affectionately, not to be insulting)

JohnR7 in this instance reminds me of that character from Kung Pow who, after using his face-to-foot style (basically lets himself get kicked in the face), claims that since he is bleeding he is the victor.

Or in another example, it is like claiming you won the game of golf because you got the highest score, or largest number.

 

[JohnR7]

Tell us how God created the earth,

Oh, now you want to change the rules and move the goal posts. If you want to know HOW God created, then start up a new thread.

 

[Data]

Oh, now you want to change the rules and move the goal posts. If you want to know HOW God created, then start up a new thread.

I think he is asking for evidence John.

 

[JohnR7]

right, I am ignoring this thread now unless someone says something interested. I am not interested in feeding such obvious trollishness
DNFTT.

Yes, that is a good idea, if all you are capable of doing is being a troll, then it would be best to not say anything at all.

 

[JohnR7]

I think he is asking for evidence John.

No, the natual record, the fossil record for example, is evidence for God having created. If you want to know HOW God created then you would in the very least have to go to the abstract evidence thread.