Young Earth Creationism Vs. Science (Statler Waldorf Contd)

[Captain Scarlet]

Why would that made up hypothesis have more going for it than the God Hypothesis? Just because you made it up? Do you always base things on your personal opinion and bias?
As I pointed out above, the guys on your aisle even admit this is a two model system. Creation by naturalistic means (Evolution) or Special Creation (Infinite source or God). The fact that creation by naturalistic means becomes more improbable (and statistically impossible) gives valid logical support to Special Creation. However, when we interpret the evidence with the special creation framework it is far more consistent than when we interpret the evidence using a naturalistic framework. I find it funny you appeal to the Scientific Method, something created by a Creationist, but you ignore the very valid logic known as the disjunctive syllogism.
So let’s play a bit of a game. You tell me, how do you know the pyramids did not arise by naturalistic means?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

So there you have it and no surprise. More interested in playing games than evidencing supernatrual creation. Rather than give you attention around the infantile discussion of: "are the pyramids built by hitherto unknown geologic processes and not by humankind". Why don't you try something novel and stop presenting arguments AGAINST evolution (which so far have been very unconvincing) and show us evidence or arguments FOR supernatural creation. I suspect the reason you don't is becuase you don't have any, or that the ones you might present my have a new hole ripped in their backside very quickly.