(August 28, 2013 at 6:18 pm)Maelstrom Wrote:(August 28, 2013 at 6:12 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: It fits the definition of science, so therefore it is science. That’s pretty simple. The fact you do not like creationism is utterly irrelevant.
Why creationism isn't science
This is a useless move against SW. If you try to bring actual evidence to the table, he may or may not read it, say a few flippant words about the link, and then proceed to shove one of his own down your throat, saying that since you presented an elephant, that he can push his own on you. After you read his elephant, the fact that you go about disagreeing with it makes him think you didn't read it.
Conclusion: evidence vs. Waldork is counter productive, as he won't face up to it honestly.
![[Image: 10314461_875206779161622_3907189760171701548_n.jpg]](https://scontent-a-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/t1.0-9/10314461_875206779161622_3907189760171701548_n.jpg)