Hello, Reserve, and welcome to EvC.
quote:
For instance, creationists assumption is that the Bible is the Word of God and therefore can be used to correctly interpret the evidence around us.
This is true. Unfortunately, these assumptions then lead to interpretations that are at odds with what we see. For instance, we know that the speed of light is finite. If the universe is only a few thousand years old, then we should not be able to see any stars that are more than a few thousand light-years away. But we can.
Creationists try to explain this away by coming up with explanations that themselves lead to inconsistent observations. For example, some claim that maybe the speed of light was different in the past. Unfortunately, we should be able to see signs that the speed of light was different, signs that we do not see.
Similarly, if the earth is only a few thousand years old, then reliable radiometric dates should indicate that no rock is more than a few thousand years old, or, perhaps, that the radiometric measurements should be a random jumble giving no consistent dates. Instead, we have consistent measurements that give the ages of rock units up to four billion years old.
Again, some would try to argue that the decay rates of radioactive elements was different in the past, but, like the speed of light, if this were true then there would be evidence seen today that would indicate that the rates were different.
Scientists, for their own reasons, would like to know whether the laws of physics (like the decay rates and the speed of light) have changed and have studied this pretty extensively. The results of these types of studies indicate that these constants have been constant in the past.
-
quote:
Evolutionists assumption is that there is no God....
Actually, evolutionists assume no such thing. All an evolutionary scientist assumes is that the evidence that we see in the present can give us information about the past. There is no reason to expect that such an assumption, if it were not true, would give a consistent picture of the history of life on earth, yet it does.
-
quote:
Creationists - world wide catastrophe -> *look in bible* -> Noah's flood
But detailed analysis of the geologic record shows that there was no global flood. A global flood would have left definite signs that are lacking.
-
quote:
Notice that Creationist and Evolutionists have the same evidence, BUT their interpretations are different. But both apply science to get their interpretations.
I find it odd to hear creationists claim this, since most conservative Christians seem to complain about post-modernism. I, for one, believe that there is a reality that exists independent of what we may believe about it, and that there was a definite history that has occurred regardless of what one believes about it. I also believe that the past leaves behind evidence that can be examined in the present, and that this past can be used to eliminate possible scenarios at the very least, and can even be used to reconstruct the past in many cases.
Creationists proceed by ignoring evidence. The evidence shows pretty clearly that the earth and the universe are billions of years old, that life has evolved over several billion years, and that there was no global flood. Not all pasts are consistent with the evidence that we have today, and creationism is not consistent with what we see today. If creationism were true we would expect to see certain evidence, and we either do not see that evidence or we see the opposite evidence. If evolution were true, we would expect to see certain evidence, and we actually do see that evidence.
Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. --
Charley the Australopithecine
™ Version 4.2