Where will "Creation Science" be in 10 years?

[The Barbarian]

If you can produce information that is useful in communication
through random processes, then you will have proven our assertions
wrong.

Barbarian offers:
Would you consider rolling dice to be random? If so, then I can give you some examples. Want to see them?

(silence)

Barbarian observes:
Guess not.

Does the word meaningless occur to anyone else?

Matter of fact it does. It's why I made the offer. It's still open if you want to learn how random processes can produce useful information. More specifically, I will show you how random processes can produce useful information in evolution.

If your assertion was meaningless, just ignore the offer.

 

[juvenissun]

*LMAO* if Creation science and ID is "advancing so strongly" as you put it, perhaps you could provide a single example of experimentally or observationally confirmed Creationism or ID?

All scientific researches today are moving toward that confirmation. You name one to me, (after I understand what it is) I can tell you how does it work toward that goal.

Everything happened on earth testifies and glorifies the power of God.

 

[The Barbarian]

In other words, there aren't any?

 

[Mallon]

Biblical and I.D creationism is advancing so strongly that it must be predicted it will either carve up present ToE ideas to smithers or be stopped by a excellent defence.
Election campaigns must address creationism which would not of happened decades ago.
Books and counter books and movies are here and coming as the money people realize there is great and growing interest in origin subjects.
Biblical creationism is becoming famous with personalities known by millions.
Museums the talk of America and creationist advanced ideas are being put forth with increasing power, confidence, and volume.

I notice you didn't note any scientific advances. Interesting.

In ten years its possible that Darwinian evolution will be on the assheap of history in the world of ideas.

And if it's not, will you eat your hat?

 

[juvenissun]

In other words, there aren't any?

I am a YEC. However, I don't think you can read that in my publications (except that I always try to challenge the conventional wisdom in geology). In that world, I am only a scientist.

 

[The Barbarian]

So, if you don't have any scientific confirmations of your beliefs, why would you expect that they should be part of science?