(April 15, 2012 at 2:30 pm)5thHorseman Wrote: Creation science is not a science, it's a hypothesis with not a hint of evidence to back it up.
A scientific hypothesis. We might agree on the validity of the evidence.
(April 15, 2012 at 2:30 pm)5thHorseman Wrote: It is also not thinking outside the box. Creation science is done by blinkered Christians who want it to be real, but offer nothing in evidence.
I wasn't talking about CS here.
Quote:The United States National Academy of Sciences states that "creation science is in fact not science and should not be presented as such." and that "the claims of creation science lack empirical support and cannot be meaningfully tested."
Like I said, I agree with this. That doesn't alter what CS proponents themselves believe that they are doing, which is using a scientific defence, and never a religious one.
So my point at the OP stands. He rejects a scientific argument, and not a religious one.
