(January 25, 2012 at 3:26 am)TheDarkestOfAngels Wrote:(January 25, 2012 at 3:15 am)Undeceived Wrote: Peer-reviewed by who? Non-evolution believing scientists have their work peer-reviewed too, and make great cases for Intelligent Design. Who’s right? From what I’ve seen, science supports creationism. If anyone here thinks it doesn’t, point out which part and I’ll explain it away.
There aren't non-evolution believing scientists and the individuals that do make the case for intelligent design aren't doing it based on science, which uses the scientific method and evidence to support their claims.
For that reason, creationism isn't science. As such, there aren't "parts" that I need to point out so much as the whole thing (creationism) is a sham. Discuss whatever you want and I'll tell you how you're utterly and completely wrong.
A 1991 Gallup poll of Americans found that about 5% of scientists identified themselves as creationists, and that didn't include those convinced of Intelligent Design, or simply unconvinced of evolution. Saying they 'aren't doing it based on science' is a straw man argument. Can you read their minds? The first hit in my google search:
http://creationists.org/former-evoltioni...tists.html
Many scientists become Christian because of their scientific discoveries. Mathematician and physicist Frank Tipler said:
When I began my career as a cosmologist some twenty years ago, I was a convinced atheist. I never in my wildest dreams imagined that one day I would be writing a book purporting to show that the central claims of Judeo-Christian theology are in fact true, that these claims are straightforward deductions of the laws of physics as we now understand them. I have been forced into these conclusions by the inexorable logic of my own special branch of physics.
To claim that a large number of people believing in one thing makes it true is an appeal to popularity fallacy. My challenge still stands. Can anyone give me true scientific support for evolution? The burden of proof is on you.