SonicHedgehog

Hello everyone, I just wanted to say I'm new to the forum. I have a few questions.

I'm a little intrigued by Creation Theory/Science. It looks to me as if the sole positive support for it (here in the US anyways) is the Bible, and then it just attacks Evolution as being fallacious. Am I wrong?

Also, I was wonder if there is a falsifiable, testable theory/hypothesis that is the core of Creation Science that does not hinge/center on/use/is based on/relies on/etc... on attacking Evolution at all. I'm asking can Creation Science support itself on its own without ever attacking evolution?

Regards,

SH

Urvogel Reverie

Unfortunately not. I suggest the following essay:

http://www.evowiki.org/wiki.phtml?ti...Creationism_Is

Urvogel Reverie

Jet Black

fundamentally, creationism cannot be falsified. To give an extreme example, God could well have created the entire universe, as is, last tuesday, and there is nothing we can do to demonstrate otherwise. The problem then becomes a theological one rather than a scientific one. This makes "creation science" somewhat of an oxymoron, since the vast majority of things done within it, were not done in a scientific manner and cannot be examined by science. They also have an arbitration problem, for example in ID (Intelligent Design) who is is that says "this cannot come about through an alternate process, it must have been an intelligent creator" - in short, it is an artificial, unjustified and arbitrary end tacked onto scientific enquiry.

rlogan

Hi Sonic!! Welcome to IIDB.

Damn straight.

hey - here's where a hedgehog can root around for some hilarious "science":Answers in Genesis

No. You just need a bottle of hair lotion and you're a creation scientist.

Wounded King

Hi Sonic,

Are you interested in developmental biology or video games? Your name suggests dev. biol.

TTFN,

WK

Plognark

Welcome

Nope!

Falsifiable? Nope!

It hasn't been demonstrated to be able to do this yet...not that i'm aware of anyhow.

Oolon Colluphid

Shurely you mean 'snake oil'?

joedad

I think the best internal falsification of creationism – don't like using creation science because it certainly isn't science – is that all creation scenarios begin with an uncreated entity. The argument usually goes something like:

"Hey, look at all the order in the universe. There's no way such a complicated, ordered universe can just happen. It had to be a conscious act. Something like the universe doesn't 'just happen' for no apparent reason. That's simply absurd. The universe is therefore evidence of a conscious designer."

And what is the nature of this "conscious designer?"

"Well....er....ah....well....it just happens to exist I guess!!"

You don't say? Imagine that!

(And welcome to the forums)

Duvenoy

Hi Sonic and welcome!

I can add little to what has already been said, so I'll just pass on the link to happy ol' talk Origins. Enjoy!

Edited to actually put in the stupid link! Sometimes I am easily distracted.

http://www.talkorigins.org/

doov

SonicHedgehog

Thanks for the warm welcome, everyone. WK, I'm interested in both video games and devo. biol. The name's a play off a hobby of mine and my (hopefully) future field of study, respectively.

I'm very, very aware of TO (a great comprehensive, highly educational site IMHO) but not about EvoWiki. Thanks for the link. As for AiG, it definately looks pretty, but that's pretty much it for me...

I'm still waiting for creationists on these boards (I know there are some) to answer this question: