Always a laugh

Gee, then what 'theories' would you like to discuss?

Give me a scientific theory that relates to creationism. I keep asking and you disappear when I ask.

quote:

---

Originally posted by TrueCreation:
"Give me a scientific theory that relates to creationism. I keep asking and you disappear when I ask."
--Hm.. I don't think I disapear, I know I've addressed this before, I would like you to tell me what you would like to be associated with? What kind of explination would you like. There is a Theory for everything really that the creationists have, lets discuss one of a specific nature. I would find it more interesting if you would tell me what you would like me to explain, like I would rather ask you how you explain something. Probley because I don't have the Evolutionist mind-set, that is, It is harder for me to point out fallacies on the creationist side than the Evolutionists.

​

---

How about providing a scientific theory? What is the problem with that? I'm leaving this as broad as you like. I would like you to explain any natural phenomenon using 'creationist science'? Clear? Good. You can be specific and identify one.

How are they different? Secondly, if it is science, why the modifier?

The scientific method is designed to test theories to determine which fits the evidence more. This continued reliance on the fiction that different interpretations that are valid is a crutch to avoid discussing evidence. Any theory must be falsifiable and those potential falsifications can be tested. Therefore saying there are different interpretations is rather meaningless. The scientific method was designed to distinguish between inferences that are supported and inferences that are not supported.