Scientific Evidence for Creationism

[Pseudonym]

Well here we are, a topic that I am sure has never been discussed on this board.

I am interested in the claim that creationism is supported by scientific evidence. I want to be provided sound evidence outside of the Bible that can be/has been tested several times. Preferably I would like to be pointed to .edu or .org sites (the only exception being for newspaper articles or Wikipedia) and not be forced to buy anything (such as books or journal subscriptions). Although I may not be able to access them, you may provide journal articles. I have access to most journals through my University of Florida account, but I can't guarantee that I can access every article ever written. That being said, be sure to provide the author(s), title of the article, title of the journal, journal edition and/or volume, and date the article was written. I should be able to find it with that much info.

I would also like the evidence to be current. Obviously I'm not going to give a specific cutoff date for what I consider to be current, but use your best judgment (i.e. do not post evidence from the 1920s unless it is truly solid science that has not been adapted or refuted since then).

Also, I'd like to ask evolutionists not to post snarky remarks such as, "Godditit!," make claims that I won't get any responses because there is no scientific evidence that supports creationism, and not post the scientific evidence they might think creationists think supports creationism. If creationists say there is scientific evidence, they are welcome to post it here themselves.

 

[azmurath]

Preferably I would like to be pointed to .edu or .org sites (the only exception being for newspaper articles or Wikipedia)

Actually Wikipeida is a .org site.

 

[Pseudonym]

I forgot about that. Everytime I type it in I use .com and goes to the same place.

 

[Adriac]

I usually just Google "wikipedia libertarianism".

Google > *

 

[JohnR7]

I am interested in the claim that creationism is supported by scientific evidence.

People have been gathering scientific evidence that the Bible is true for hundreds of years now. Archeology for example is evidence that the Bible is true, because it confirms that much of what we read in our Bible is true.

Recently the hot off the press DNA studies have shown the Bible to be true. For example the Cohen Gene shows at least that part of the Bible to be true. Also a lot of the work they are doing at the University of Jerusalem with the DNA of the Hebrew people, verifys what the Bible says to be true.

These are just two examples of the vast scientific evidence that shows the Bible is true.

 

[azmurath]

People have been gathering scientific evidence that the Bible is true for hundreds of years now. Archeology for example is evidence that the Bible is true, because it confirms that much of what we read in our Bible is true.

Recently the hot off the press DNA studies have shown the Bible to be true. For example the Cohen Gene shows at least that part of the Bible to be true. Also a lot of the work they are doing at the University of Jerusalem with the DNA of the Hebrew people, verifys what the Bible says to be true.

These are just two examples of the vast scientific evidence that shows the Bible is true.

Ok, these are two broad subjects that YOU say verify the Bible. Where are your sources? Just because one part of the Bible is true does not make the whole thing true, I know for a fact that some thing sin there are true like that Rome crucified peopel for doing what Jesus did... although they never used crosses, I am fairly certain that was added during one of the little Bible changing pow-wows.

Show me scientific evidence of CREATIONISM,

 

[random_guy]

People have been gathering scientific evidence that the Bible is true for hundreds of years now. Archeology for example is evidence that the Bible is true, because it confirms that much of what we read in our Bible is true.

Recently the hot off the press DNA studies have shown the Bible to be true. For example the Cohen Gene shows at least that part of the Bible to be true. Also a lot of the work they are doing at the University of Jerusalem with the DNA of the Hebrew people, verifys what the Bible says to be true.

These are just two examples of the vast scientific evidence that shows the Bible is true.

Science also proves that the Odyssey is true since archeology continues to find evidence of Troy and Greece. I guess we'd better look out for Zeus!

 

[azmurath]

Science also proves that the Odyssey is true since archeology continues to find evidence of Troy and Greece. I guess we'd better look out for Zeus!

Very true, in fact they think they have pinpointed the layer that was there during the Trojan War.

 

[Oonna]

Recently the hot off the press DNA studies have shown the Bible to be true.

Im sorry, i dont understand...how can DNA prove the bible to be true or false?

 

[azmurath]

DNA can show a person is related now, but unless we have physical evidence of people from the Bible, DNA cant do jack for it. DNA is not labeled with little tags saying "This gene is from Jesus, this gene is from Abel, this gene is from Moses", they are labelled A G T P , billions of times over and over again, and unless you know the genetic code of that specific person, it is like trying to find yourself through a maze the size of the galaxy without a light and without a map.

 

[JohnR7]

Im sorry, i dont understand...how can DNA prove the bible to be true or false?

There are a lot of geneologys in the Bible. The Bible also calls them generations. For example

Genesis 2:4
These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,

Just like Archeology shows that the citys in the Bible were real cities. The work on DNA shows that the genealogys in the Bible are accurate and true. Just run a search on genealogy & dna. Lots of results will come up.

 

[JohnR7]

DNA can show a person is related now, but unless we have physical evidence of people from the Bible, DNA cant do jack for it.

That is exactly true, DNA can not do "jack". If the Bible were not true, then the DNA evidence would very easily falsify it. But the genealogys in the Bible are accurate and true and the DNA evidence verifys that.

The mormons are having a difficult time right now, because they are required to find Native Americans that are of Hebrew decent in the last 6,000 years. There maybe some evidence for that, but not much.

 

[random_guy]

That is exactly true, DNA can not do "jack". If the Bible were not true, then the DNA evidence would very easily falsify it. But the genealogys in the Bible are accurate and true and the DNA evidence verifys that.

The mormons are having a difficult time right now, because they are required to find Native Americans that are of Hebrew decent in the last 6,000 years. There maybe some evidence for that, but not much.

Geneologies being accurate doesn't make other parts of the Bible historically accurate any more than Troy existing makes Achille's famous heel true.

 

[Pseudonym]

People have been gathering scientific evidence that the Bible is true for hundreds of years now. Archeology for example is evidence that the Bible is true, because it confirms that much of what we read in our Bible is true.

Recently the hot off the press DNA studies have shown the Bible to be true. For example the Cohen Gene shows at least that part of the Bible to be true. Also a lot of the work they are doing at the University of Jerusalem with the DNA of the Hebrew people, verifys what the Bible says to be true.

These are just two examples of the vast scientific evidence that shows the Bible is true.

There are a lot of geneologys in the Bible. The Bible also calls them generations. For example

Genesis 2:4
These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,

Just like Archeology shows that the citys in the Bible were real cities. The work on DNA shows that the genealogys in the Bible are accurate and true. Just run a search on genealogy & dna. Lots of results will come up.

I appreciate your replies, but I must redirect you to my OP. I would very much like sources in any form as I have previously mentioned. I understand that I can do a Google search myself, but I am not asking for you to tell me to do a Google search. I want creationists to provide the exact sources whether they be journal articles, newspaper articles, or any reputable website.

 

[I_Love_Cheese]

People have been gathering scientific evidence that the Bible is true for hundreds of years now. Archeology for example is evidence that the Bible is true, because it confirms that much of what we read in our Bible is true.

As you should know by now, scientific evidence cannont be used to prove the truth of something.

A better statement would be that Archaeology provides some evidence that some parts of the Bible are not false.

Recently the hot off the press DNA studies have shown the Bible to be true. For example the Cohen Gene shows at least that part of the Bible to be true.

Again, what you really have is evidence that there were people living in the area called the fertile crescent who are related to people who consider themselves Jews today. That is all.

Also a lot of the work they are doing at the University of Jerusalem with the DNA of the Hebrew people, verifys what the Bible says to be true.

Once again, all it shows in this sense is that the people who claim middle-eastern ancestry appear to have it. It does not prove the Bible. Science doesn't prove things, all you have done is find evidence that the people who wrote the stories are from where they say they were from which ,to my knowledge, has never been in question.

These are just two examples of the vast scientific evidence that shows the Bible is true.

If these are typical, you have a long way to go to use the scientific method to convince anyone of the validity of your Bible/theory.

Do you not see the foolishness of attempting to justify your faith through science?

Science can never prove, science can only eliminate a possibility.
Scientific theories are only accepted as the best explanation that we have to date. As such their only value is that they have not been made worthless, is this all your faith is worth, that it has not been shown to be worthless?

As an agnostic, I thought that faith was worth more than that. If faith is only worthwhile if you can prove it, then ?

 

[PETE_]

The Genesis Flood by Whitcomb has some great info on the flood

 

[I_Love_Cheese]

The Genesis Flood by Whitcomb has some great info on the flood

Link for the newbie and the first review as well from the same source.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0875523382/002-7376985-3349640?v=glance&n=283155

Out of Date, December 26, 2000
Reviewer:Jonathan Bailey (Lawton, OK USA) - See all my reviews
I am saying this as a creationist: This book needs to be updated. It is just too out of date. Morris' refutation of radiometric dating is that decay rates are innaccurate and unproven. That is because 40 years ago when this book was written radiochronology was new. Now I agree that radiometric dating is unreliable because there are too many unknowns in our assumptions about what should be in a sample that we measure, but it is simply a fact that we can measure them accurately. Aside from this point, most the bibliographic references in this book are all from the 50s. It is simply not usable as an evangelistic tool. Creationists need to abandon this book for one that is based on current research.

 

[Kahalachan]

People have been gathering scientific evidence that the Bible is true for hundreds of years now. Archeology for example is evidence that the Bible is true, because it confirms that much of what we read in our Bible is true.

Recently the hot off the press DNA studies have shown the Bible to be true. For example the Cohen Gene shows at least that part of the Bible to be true. Also a lot of the work they are doing at the University of Jerusalem with the DNA of the Hebrew people, verifys what the Bible says to be true.

These are just two examples of the vast scientific evidence that shows the Bible is true.

This doesn't address Creationism whatsoever. Only those parts of the Bible. You can't say the whole Bible is word for word literal when evidence only supports those parts.

You haven't given evidence for Creationism yet.

 

[SinfulMessiah]

The Genesis Flood by Whitcomb has some great info on the flood

Providing evidence that there was an actual flood is not evidence also that the Noah story is even plausible.

 

[PETE_]

The Bible is a book of history. If the record is valid for everything else why woul just one area be wrong?