Chuck77 writes:
Well, for one Creationists would be better able to make there points with the evidence that is available to them. The evidence that is supplied by Creation scientists for instance.
Are those scientists doing science? If yes, then it can be presented in the "science" section of this forum. If they are not, then you are admitting creation science is not science but a religious dogma.
There are Creationists that do research and when it's stated in a Science forum like the great flood for example it's shot down gibberish. It isn't doing anything for the discussion.
It's either legitimate science, or it is not. Where it is posted does not change this fact.
It would be a better way for Creationists to express themselves here instead of fearing they might get suspended for supplying evidence that evolutionists don't agree with.
I don't think anyone gets suspende here for posting evidence somebody else doesn't agree with.
What's so hard to understand? Creationists have their hands tied here. It's no fun. It should be exciting to debate with people instead of fearing you are potentialy "lying" or trying to decieve everyone intentionally when you're only trying to convey the evidence you have from certain sources.
Again, if the evidence is legitimate science, there's no problem posting it in the science section.
Isn't the evidence available to all? Is it so bad to present the only evidence we have? What else can creationists do? I guess we could stop debating in the Science forums, which seems to have already happened.
So, you're saying creationists don't use science? They're using religious dogma?
™ Version 4.2