Why do Creationists try to pass off debunking a theory as a theory in itself?

Question

..........it's not.

Answer 1

Good question. I doubt that any creationist will give a good answer though.

To Yahoo_Guinea_Pig: No, you are yet another person who doesn't understand the way the word Theory is used in science. Consider that Einstein's Theory of Relativity is not called the Law of Relativity. You've probably never heard of it, but James Maxwell's Theory of Electromagnetism unified our understanding of magnetism, electricity, and light. It's not called the Law of Electromagnetism.

Often a Theory is a framework of multiple laws. Note that scientific language is idiomatic, just like all language. Scientists use the word "theory" when they are proposing a new Theory that has not yet stood the test of time, and then also use the word Theory (often with the capital T) to refer to theories that have stood the test of time. The Theory of Evolution is definitely in the latter category. The overwhelming majority of biologists (all but a few cranks) accept the Theory of Evolution as having been proved to be true. If you examine the so called Intelligent Design movement, you'll find that almost none of the legitimate scientists that support it are biologists. The most famous ID proponents are mathematicians who try to use Information Theory (yes, there's that word again, and the ID'ers use it!) to prove that Evolution could not be true for probabilistic reasons. There arguments sound reasonable if you don't have a strong background in mathematics, but have been debunked many times on purely mathematical grounds.

Answer 2

Because they have no proof of anything or even any theories. Their only belief is that 'god' waved a magic wand and made things appear. Since they can't accept that there could be any other possible answer other than the mythology of the bible, their only tactic is to try (poorly) to poke holes in evolution.
What they fail to comprehend is that science likes, wants and needs unanswered questions. The only way to understand something is by asking questions about it and gradually learning all you can about it.
Theist prefer the simple, easy answer of 'god did it'. There is no questioning or debate when you answer like that. You just get a single answer. Too bad for them they have no proof to back up their claim, so they have to go back to the 'you just have to have Faith' cop out.

Answer 3

I think they are both right (creation and evolution).

The Sikh philosophy is (paraphrasing):

God created everything, so long ago we cannot even begin to calculate.

For an unknown great length of time, man had no greater intelligence than any other being.

But as man lived and died through the cycles of life, he slowly was granted by God with a greater sense of intelligence and conscious awareness.

This still continues until we have total consciousness of God and thus merge with God rather than reincarnate (again as man).

Answer 4

Maybe they think that disproving evolution automatically makes creationism correct. It doesn't. In order for creationism to be accepted as correct, it must be able to make observable predictions, but it does not nor cannot by its own definitions: God made it all in the past. How can that make an observable prediction? Is anything being created now by God? No.

Answer 5

CREATION MAKES SO MUCH SENSE

It does not say that a billion souls were created all at the same time.

The book does not give the age of the earth, the world is the last thing upon the face of the earth, with a couple of souls being created instead of billions of souls, the age of the world and the people making it up down through the thousands of years from LOST to SAVED is the subject intended. John 3:16;

PEOPLE AND THEIR STORIES AND THE WORLD EMPIRE THE EXISTED IN AND THE TIME OF THE WORLD EMPIRES IN WORLD HISTORY FIRST TO THE LAST.

Answer 6

I'm not sure, cause most of evolution's claims are not falsifiable, kinda like creationism. Sure we can look at some data, like the age of rocks and the universe but you can't try to splatter water with amino acids and make life. It doesn't work, and yet it doesn't make it falsified. So neither are really theories. They are more speculation.

Answer 7

who knows. What theory have they debunked?

Answer 8

Saying "god did it" has as much validity as saying a pig took a dump and that dump is the universe and everything in it.

Answer 9

Why do religious folk ask circular questions and provide circular "logic" to combat science and real logic?

Answer 10

If the theory of evolution were not a theory it would be the law of evolution, wouldn't it?