User Name:


FAQ Donate Join

General Discussion
Louisiana Senate Bill 733

What scientific data related to creationism???? What could they even claim to be scientific?

"The bill's sponsor, Senator Ben Nevers (D-Bogalusa), told the Hammond Daily Star (April 6, 2008) that the LFF drafted the bill and believe[s] that scientific data related to creationism should be discussed."

Scientific data disproving Creationism is kinda related to it. :) scnr

If the idea is that nobody can prove anything one way or another; I think they can. Scientists try to answer questions about how things came to be the way they are, but creationist never do their "questioning" ends with "god did it." Creationism is a religious belief, which claims that a supernatural being created the universe. Creation Science is not science. It is based on the belief that the stories in Genesis are accurate accounts of the origin of the universe and life on earth. It is incompatible with the Big Bang theory and the theory of evolution. Creation scientists claim that Genesis is the word of God and thus infallibly true. They also claim that Genesis contradicts the Big Bang theory and the theory of Evolution. Therefore, those theories are false and scientists who advocate such theories are ignorant of the truth about the origins of the universe and life on Earth. They also claim that creationism is a scientific theory and should be taught in our science curriculum as a competitor to the Big Bang theory and Evolution.

In Genesis God made day and night on the first day even though he didn't make the sun and moon until the fourth day. Science is not tolerant of failed hypotheses they are thrown out. "The Cosmic Microwave Background" is incontrovertible evidence that the Universe experienced a "Big Bang." Biologists study transitional fossils; we can examine them in hundreds of museums around the world, and we make new discoveries in the rocks all the time. Scientists have proven that protocells can be easily created from simple chemicals in the laboratory; we can repeat the experiments with comparable results. We can also create artificial species of plants and animals by applying selection, and we can observe natural speciation in action.

There are big differences between scientific research and creation science with no testable theory whatsoever. Scientific theories are based on research and evidence, whereas creation science is based on blessed assurance, and in spite of the evidence. Scientific development of theories has been a problem for the clergy throughout history. Finally, someone decided that science could answer some important questions, and that it was important to answer the "questions" that were not being answered with information that was usable in any real sense. That is why science was developed (to answer questions.)

Creationism's approach to science is that life is too complicated to have arisen without the help of a supernatural agent. Has creation science proven that there is a complex god that came from nothing; if they have I didn't hear about it? There are all sorts of findings and experiments that could have falsified Evolution. In the century-and-a-half since Darwin published his theory, not one has. If something is a scientific hypothesis or theory it makes predictions that can be tested. If so it will be possible to falsify. What is found in the progression over time seen in the millions of fossils unearthed around the world is exactly what evolutionary theory predicts.

So, 'creationists' try to prove scientists wrong by denying that Evolution or the Big Bang theory because it is proof of the fallacy of the one-week creation in Genesis. Scientists do not develop theories or hypothesis about subjects that can't be falsified or proven. Scientists have no theories about God because it's not science. Scientists can't find answers about things that nobody has any tangible or testable proof that it exists. Because they failed to have evolutionary theory banned from education creationist are trying to introduce their religion (taught as creation science) that is the biblical version of creation (it is not science). They have failed to deceive scholars who basically know the religious nature of creationism. Because they have no convincing arguments for creationism they attack any unknown component of science while they mislead some people that the bible has all the answers. Something can't come from nothing (one of their favorite arguments)! Everything that exists is either matter or energy. Did god make the Universe from something or nothing? If the creation scientists can't tell us what god is made of or what god made the Universe from than they haven't answered anything.

Follow us on:

twitter facebook meetup