Can Atheist read books and still refuse the Scientific Evidence for Creation?

Question

In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood by Walter T. Brown

The Creation Hypothesis : Scientific Evidence For An Intelligent Designer by J.P. Moreland

The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict: Fully Updated to Answer the Questions Challenging Christians Today by Josh McDowell

The Real Face of Atheism, by Ravi Zacharias

Evidence for Christianity by Josh McDowell

Answer 1

Evolution is unproven voodoo science, a mere guess by scientists who can't prove it. If they had proven it, it would not be a Law, not just a Theory.

And look in any dictionary, the word 'theory' means a guess.

Life can't evolve from non-life, so that means the very first life form couldn't evolve, it had to be created. And that proves a higher power that could create life, and that higher power is God.

Looks like Darwin has made a monkey out of you evolutionists.

Answer 2

Actually, there is no scientific evidence for creation. Most of the books that support creationism are based on fallacies of logic and reason. They typically point at areas of scientific reasoning and make an argument as follows: "Well, science doesn't know EVERYTHING about evolution or the Big Bang, so therefore we must fill in the gaps with god."

That's been going on for two thousand years. And yet each year the scientific case against the existence of a deity continue to grow. Let's face it, from a scientific standpoint god - if he/she does exist - plays such a small role that he/she might as well not exist. Our lives wouldn't change a bit.

Answer 3

That is called pseudo science. Irreducible complexity, the only convincing argument for creationism, has no empirical evidence to back it up. Creationism is not real science, it is a perversion of science that declares a conclusion then finds evidence to support it, ignoring all other posibilities. Please get educated...

Answer 4

I have read a couple of those books. Other than providing excellent examples of the laughable use of logical fallacies including dishonest strawman arguments, arguments from ignorance etc. I found no value in them.

Answer 5

Yes, the scientific proof for evolution is more compelling and believable to an atheist

Answer 6

just cause i;m an athiest doesn;t mean I cannot read
or understand someone;s tripe.

who cares about the scientific evidence of creation

by the time your dead you will still not even know who you are.

so don;t worry about,

you just think you know were you came from.

but there is much eveidence that men came from mars
and woman came from pluto.......

Answer 7

I read books all the time. Right now I am rereading Plato's Republic. There is no scientific evidence for creation. But there is for evolution:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061030/ap_on_sc/ancient_bee

Answer 8

There is no scientific evidence for creation, you pillock.

And if you want to argue against evolution, you'll be arguing against my entire fossil collection at the very least.... and thats about as real as it gets for me since I found them myself and can pick them up and hold them in my own hands... observe them with my own eyes, even taste them if I want to. First-hand evidence... Its nifty stuff.

Answer 9

I see your four books of pseudo-scientific twaddle and raise you a library of peer-reviewed research.

Go away, and read something worthwhile for a change.

Answer 10

There is no "Scientific Evidence" for the Creation. Moreland's book is still supposition.