A Few Questions For Creationists

Here is one.

---

Fossil: KNM-ER 3733Site: Koobi Fora (Upper KBS tuff, area 104), Lake Turkana, Kenya (4, 1)Discovered By: B. Ngeneo, 1975 (1)Estimated Age of Fossil: 1.75 mya * determined by Stratigraphic, faunal, paleomagnetic & radiometric data (1, 4)Species Name:
Homo ergaster (1, 7, 8),
Homo erectus (3, 4, 7),
Homo erectus ergaster (25)Gender: Female (species presumed to be sexually dimorphic) (1, 8)Cranial Capacity: 850 cc (1, 3, 4)Information: Tools found in same layer (8, 9). Found with KNM-ER 406 A. boisei (effectively eliminating single species hypothesis) (1)Interpretation: Adult (based on cranial sutures, molar eruption and dental wear) (1)See original source for notes:Source: Default 404 | Museum of Science, Boston

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

I think you have a complete non-sequitur.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Sure. You wrote: What a scientist does some four billion years after the fact does not change that fact.If life arose from natural causes and agents, the fact that a scientist can replicate that series of events at a later date does not change that original series of events into something different.Suggesting that because a scientist four billion years later can replicate those events certainly would not show that those original events were caused by an intelligence.The two events are unrelated, hence a non-sequitur.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Not so.When a scientist creates, for example, water from H and O₂ in the laboratory that does not prove, nor even suggest, that all water everywhere was created by a scientist, by an intelligence, or in a laboratory. It does show one pathway by which water could be created. That is about all.Attributing causation is a complete non-sequitur. The events are unrelated.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.