"Evidence and Faith"

We are not talking about creation as in god creating the universe. We are talking about creation as pushed by the cultist where the earth was created 6,000 years ago followed by a world wide flood.If we say "If the above is true, then...." we end up with a lot of things showing that the above is not true. The hypothosis is falsified. Those who continue to push it are, as has been noted, either lying or insane.

This is a negative statment: "There are NO examples of...". You can't prove that without an exhaustive search.However, it is easy to disprove such a statment, produce an example.I'm prepared to believe that it might be possible. I'm also prepared to believe that the example will only make creation science look really silly when compared to the examples from real science. I look forward to the attempts.

RR, you are confused as to what is being talked about. The pink unicorns point was in regards to your request that someone prove that creation science had never produced any controbutions.How does your list and question tie to that? You seem to be very mixed up on that. The pink unicorn example was meant to be an analogy to the creation science contributions. We suggest that neither exist but no one can prove (100 % totally) that they don't.However, in both cases one pink unicorn or one contribution would show the suggestion to be false.On the other hand maybe you just phrased it wrong?Are you offering that list as possible contributions? If so take your favorite and make a thread on it. One by one they will be shown to be either not a contribution or demonstratably wrong. (e.g if they refer to a question/mystery/unanswered issue in some science it isn't something they contributed is it?)