Home > Content > Creation and Evolution > Discussion: why creationists doesn't know what they are talking about.
why creationists doesn't know what they are talking about.
1 Comments - 938 Views
Submitted By Ellman on 09/05/18
FreeHovind, Ellman, Creation and Evolution 

Hey, found this on the creationwiki. Might be the reason why no creationists understand what the theory of evolution is.

"The theory of evolution is an explanation for the origin of the cosmos and life on Earth, which is more formally known as the General Theory of Evolution. It was derived from atheistic presupposition, although some theists now espouse to the idea. The theory of evolution encompasses the processes of biological evolution, the origin of life, and aspects of cosmic evolution via the Big Bang. "

faulty things in this statement:
1. The theory of evolution does NOT explain how the cosmos and life came to be!
2. It does NOT derive from atheistic presuppositions! Darwin was a theist so how can his ideas be atheistic presuppositions???
3. The theory does not encompass the process of cosmic evolution and bigbang.
4. It does not encompass the origin of life either.
5. No sources at all. How convenient...

325 i found this for you to rape ^^

"Much of its theoretic development was based on philosophical materialism (matter is the only reality),[2] and it either implicitly or explicitly denies the existence of God (atheism)."
Go ahead, make my day.

all can be found here http://creationwiki.org/Theory_of_evolution
The real info that is well sourced and documented is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

» Reply to Comment
Re: why creationists doesn't know what they are talking about.
5 days - 8,032v
Posted 2009/05/18 - 23:07 GMT
"
325 i found this for you to rape ^^"
 
YAY logirape
 
""Much of its theoretic development was based on philosophical materialism (matter is the only reality),[2] and it either implicitly or explicitly denies the existence of God (atheism).""
 
1 grand thing wrong here.
science doesn't say anything about the existence of god. it only deals with the natural world, that which we can observe.
so we'll only propose natural explinations.
 
as god is supernatural....well you get the idea.
 
if something is shown to have a natural explination, why pick a supernatural one?
 
but i'll only waste my time laughign at creationwiki, i can't be bother to spend time debunking it, it's been done already...why bother if the creationists won't accept the rebuttals...


This website is powered by Plexpedia
Usage of this site constitutes agreement to the » Legal Stuff