- Thread starter
The Hairy Wookie
- 4 Feb 2005
- Reaction score
Which is exactly why creationism isn't a science. It is not falsifiable. It is an opinion, with no evidence to back up its claim apart from godunnit.- Definition of "scientific theory":
a theory that explains scientific observations; "scientific theories must be falsifiable"
Macro and micro evolution are terms that the general scientific community dropped decades ago and are only used by creationists because evolution is testable and has been shown which shoots holes in their ID arguments.
So far, Remixer, you have thrown in aguments and statemnts to justify creationism without any actual understanding of what they are or how they work, ie: falsibility, the mis-use of macro and micro evolution. Have you just got the big book of creationisn nonsense by Harun Haya and quote from it, because so far all your points are typical creationist mis-direction and lack of understanding.
On another point, which form of creationism do we teach in the classroom? The Abrahamic version, the Hindu version, or Buddhist, Shinto etc.? There are approximately 10 000 living religions in the world today. Teach creation myths, but not in science as none of them are science, they are just myths.