(February 12, 2013 at 6:01 pm)Stimbo Wrote: If an observation of the Universe has been tested repeatedly and finally becomes a descriptive model that not only explains whatever is under scrutiny but also can be used to makes predictions of how it ought to behave under varying circumstances, it becomes a theory. Even then, after reaching such a lofty height, it will continue to be tested against new observations and new advances in investigative methods. As it passes each test, confidence in the truth of the theory increases; even more so when it corresponds with other theories in different but related fields.
What in creationism comes anywhere close to that?
I do not believe creationism has to follow the same rules HUMANS have put forth in proving theories and other hypotheses (sp?). I believe it is above our minds and our reasoning.
But think about it - creationism (and Christianity) can account for so many things: how the universe came into being, how we came into being, how everything around us has come into being in such a beautiful way (many scientific theories try to convince that these things just happened to align this way?)
Granted, I have a limited understanding of evolution, but creationism seems to make much more sense to me. But again, I believe creationism is above us. I'm even uncomfortable giving it a term.
ronedee Wrote:Science doesn't have a good explaination for water