Once again, CREATIONISTS!

[Psudopod]

No --- it would have to be dated. The difference is that an atheist would conclude that it grew that old, and a Creationist would believe it was made that old.

Notice that the two agree on the age, it's just how it got that age that is in question.

There's no reason science and Scripture cannot walk hand-in-hand.

So basically, you'd perfor science exactly same, accept the results based on the strength of the evidence, but know in your heart that God created all? Congratulations, you're a theistic evolutionist.

No --- I wouldn't know litmus paper if it turned blue on me.

I'm not asking what you know. I'm asking how you use Godly paradigms to understand chemistry. Can using Godly paradigms make us better catalysts? If not, why should we use it? How would you save the life of the second child in my example?

If using Godly paradigms does not get better results, there is no reason to use them. See my last comment on the last post I made.

 

[Psudopod]

Bumped because I'd like an answer.