There's an overwhelming amount of evidence supporting it. Otherwise, we'd call it a hypothesis, or an ascertion. On the other hand, creationism is not a theory, hypothesis nor an ascertion, because it has been disproved in many different fields, so it only classifies as a dellusion.
*any one speciffic religion. I also chekced the statement that God is mentioned in the Declaration of Independance, and guess what I found: while the Declaration does mention the word "Creator", it does not state if this creator is Yahweh, Jesus, Allah, Zeus, Pulsaris, or Cthulhu, so calling this "Christian proof" is dishonest to say the very least
00
#3
Suggested by
Leo Lazar Jakšić
Biblical Prophecies
42
Leo Lazar Jakšić
9 years ago Report
Pretty much any passage in the Bible is vague at best and open to misinterpretation, so any kind of prophecy mentioned can be translated in many ways, but the most notable ones, of Jesus returning within a single generation or the destruction of Tyre, for example, have turned out to be definitely false.
00
#4
Suggested by
Leo Lazar Jakšić
"If we evolved from monkeys, why do we still have monkeys?"
Not to mention, there's plenty of countervariations to this argument: if Americans came from English settlers, why are there still English people? If God created Adam out of dirt, why is there still dirt? If you came from your parents, why do you still have parents? See where I'm going with this?
Fact is, people make the worst kind of evidence because they can lie on their trials, they can leave out details, or they can simply misinterpret the events. All of the above events have left behind evidence that can be detected, studied and tell us a tale regardless of lack of eyewitnesses. On the other hand, there is no evidence that the Bible is
But do you know what nobody really never proved? An adult organism being conjured out of nothing fully formed by a supreme entity. Nobody has ever proven creation as a fact.
*are father and son. The argment is completely wrong, and entirely misrepresentative, yet it's still being pulled out by creationists who are either delluded, dumb or dishonest and have no idea about evolution and science to begin with.
99% of the universe is uninhabitable empty space, over 70% of Earth's surface is covered in undrinkable saltwater, oxygen makes up only 21% of the air, there's predators, pests, germs and many more deadly things roaming our planet, so whoever this intelligent designer is, he did NOT made this world hospitable for our species.
In short, a creationists using this argument clearly has no idea what the 2nd Law really says and/or has no idea about science in general. This is easily the dumbest, most milked argument ever.
