I'm firmly confident that the theory of creation is a much better fit to the data than evolution. Evolution makes statements about origins yet supposedly when pressed on this, evolutionists always back away throwing the blame onto some other theory. This is ridiculously unfair as creation also makes claims about origins and we don't throw our origins onto some other theory.
28 comments
"I'm firmly confident that the theory of creation is a much better fit to the data than evolution."
Please define precisely and then explain completely the "theory" of creation. Note that if you use the word "god" or some derivative thereof, or mention any other equally unevidenced "creator" you've failed. Theories must explain all of the evidence and if you're going to posit the existence of a creator you'll need to first show evidence for one and then explain why no other explanation is valid.
"Evolution makes statements about origins yet supposedly when pressed on this, evolutionists always back away throwing the blame onto some other theory."
Evolution says nothing about the origins of life. Never has.
"This is ridiculously unfair as creation also makes claims about origins and we don't throw our origins onto some other theory."
No, you throw it onto some unevidenced sky man instead.
I'll just cut to the chase: No.
A) Evolution doesn't make any claims about the origins of life, the universe, or anything else. (It's already been said, but I think it bears repeating.)
B)If by 'throwing the blame onto some other theory' you mean 'pointing out a theory which actually DOES make claims about the origins of the universe (and has the evidence to back it up)', then yeah, I guess we DO do that. We're just dicks, aren't we?
Your theory is a square peg. The data is a circular slot. Your theory will never fit the data.
Evolution deals with the diversity of species. Abiogenesis deals with the beginnings of life itself. Two completely different, although related, theories.
The big bang theory is completely separate from both of those theories.
1 You wouldn't know the data if it sat on your face and wriggled around.
2 You don't have a theory, you have a theology, yes the words look similar but mean two very, very different things.
"Evolution makes statements about origins yet supposedly when pressed on this, evolutionists always back away throwing the blame onto some other theory." Evolution makes statements about the origins of NEW SPECIES from EARLIER ANCESTORS.
You Creationist yahoos simply can't tell the difference between these kinds of "origins", and the origin of life itself, can you?
Congragulations, you've just discovered how theories work. Theories exist to explain one set of facts or phenomenon. The diversity of life, and the origin if life, are not the same thing, therefore they require different explanations. Sucks that the world doesn't have one nice, big, context free answer to brush over everything.
Evolution is a property of life.
Gravity is a property of matter.
Please explain why the first is a problem but the second is not.
WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG.. and, uh, wrong.
Actually, creation is an exact fit to the evidence. Every last little bit of it.
Creation fits all available (and possible) evidence 100%!
That's because whatever data you, I or anyone else finds, the explanation "Yup! That's the way Goddidit!" will always fit it.
Now try and predict something.
I'm firmly confident you're talking from your ass.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
