Young Earth Creationism Vs. Science (Statler Waldorf Contd)

[Captain Scarlet]

Captain,

Please give an example of a prediction that evolution (common descent) has made in the fields of medical research and agricultural research that could not also have been predicted just as well by supernatural creation by a God who initially created various "kinds" and who built into the DNA of those "kinds" the potential for the evolution (change) of those original "kinds".

Hi rjh4.

There aren't any examples (at least that I'm aware of). Why should there be as we are talking about the practical application of the same thing? In the version of supernatural creation you've outlined it seems (and I may have this wrong?) to replace just abiogenesis, and not abiogenesis and evolution or just evolution. If one excludes the starting point (either abiogenesis or supernatural creation) both mechanisms are identical ie evolution (by means of natural selection). I would take issue with a YEC interpretation however because evolution takes time. There is poor evidence for abiogenesis and no evidence at all for supernatural creation. I am therefore open to the question on how life got strated, no-one knows that - yet. But I guess we can all agree that the best chance we have of finding out is through scientific inquiry.

If we switch to a full creationist agenda based around ID, YEC etc which denied evolution, then there would be a difference. You have no application or predictive power in this model as it would state all things come into existence fully formed and do not change through time. Presumabley the only way to better adapt to your environment, systematically improve crop yields, study bacterial mutation rates and then develop countermeasures would be to...I guess just pray!