It sounds more true and believable compared 2 other religon's thoeries about creation of life.......whaddu say
2007-01-10 07:00:44 · 13 answers · asked by i hate humanity, i love God 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Yes, I do, and in fact I intend to teach a course in Creation Science at a local community college. I could teach you thousands of things that support creation and deny evolution, but it would be best if you read it for yourself. I would suggest reading "The Evolution Cruncher" by Vance Ferrell. It contains a wealth of scientific information that you'll never learn in a liberal college.
2007-01-10 07:11:20 · answer #1 · answered by FUNdie 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The bottom line is that no one has ever observed one general kind of animal change into another. This is a fact not a theory. the lowest level of strata that geologists have is the Cambrian level and there we OBSERVE most general kinds of animals already fully developed and together. Again this is a fact not a theory. So no one can scientifically say how those Cambrian fossils got there since there are no fossils below that level. You have to go outside of science and that is where the biblical creation story fits best which includes that all animals and people were made within days of each other and that they were made to reproduce according to their general kind(which is what we OBSERVE as fact not theory when it comes to reproducing in like kinds). How could just one animal, say a mouse (assuming that somehow we got one), become pregnant if there was no male or female mice around. That means you would have to have male and female reproductive organs develop. To this day we not not find a male born with female reproductive organs or visa versa (thank God). The first mouse would die out and that would be the end of all future mice. Also all of that would have to be repeated probably thousands of times for all the different animals that have existed. That really takes FAITH to believe. I'll use a little faith and believe male and female versions of animals were made together except for literally a handful of asexual creatures such as worms and hydras which reproduce by themselves without sex because they were probably created that way. Intelligent Design has the following scientfic points behind it: Irreducible Complexity, Information Theory and Design Theory. I won't elaborate here because i have already wrote a lot.
2016-05-23 05:25:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
THE GENEALOGY OF JESUS AT 6,073, IS NOT THE AGE OF THE EARTH
~~~~~ Gen.1:1,2 All Exist. 1:3-25 Earth prepared. Space Job 38:30-32;
>0130 Adam Gen.5:3
>0105 Shem Gen.5:6
>0090 Enos Gen.5:9
>0070 Cainan Gen.5:12
>0056 Mahalaleel Gen.5:15
>0162 Jared Gen.5:18
>0065 Enoch Gen.5:21
>0187 Methusalen Gen.5:25
>0182 Lamech Gen.5:28
~~~~~ 1056.
>1056 Noah born
>0600 age of Noah, Flood Gen.7:6
~~~~~ Flood year 1656.
>0000 Noah 350 years Gen.9:28,29
>0000 Shem 502 years Gen.11:10,11
>0222 Gen.11:10, 12, 14, 16, 18,
>0205 427 Gen.11:20, 22, 24, 32 [ 205 ];
>0430 857 Exo.7,7; 12:40,41; Gal.3:16-18
>0040 897 Num.33:38,39; Deut.34:7
>0000 898th year. Josh.5:6,10,12; 1st year.
>0000 Judges 11:26; 300 & 898 is 1198.
>0000 Acts 13:20 450 & 857 is 1307.
>0480 1Ki.6:1; Land 897 to 1377.
>0036 1Ki.11:42 Solomon dies. 997BC
>3069 & 997 & 2007 is 6073 after Adam as LOST to SAVED.
>0000 Rev.20:6; 1000 is 7072 years accounted for.
THE GENEALOGY OF JESUS IS NOT THE AGE OF THE EARTH
2007-01-10 15:28:02 · answer #3 · answered by jeni 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Its not science. The supreme court made a ruling on that and if its not science its just religion. In fact intelligent design is nothing more than creationism in a cheap tuxedo.
Its a load of rubbish. If you want to learn about reality you look in a scientific textbook, if you do there's many thousands to choose from, if you dont, then hide in an ancient fairytale. In which case you'll be stuck with one.
2007-01-10 07:04:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
As a conjecture or opinion (not necessarily based on facts) it's fine. As a scientific theory it can't fly because a scientific theory is something which is capable of being tested and is backed by a body of evidence. Intelligent design doesn't meet those standards no matter how many people believe in it.
2007-01-10 07:15:39 · answer #5 · answered by Sun: supporting gay rights 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Compared to religions' creation stories? Sure it does. Compared to real science? Not so much.
2007-01-10 07:05:13 · answer #6 · answered by The Resurrectionist 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The world is far too complex to have been the product of design or intelligence.
2007-01-10 07:05:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
The proponents of this theory are proof that "intelligence" has nothing to do with it
2007-01-10 07:04:59 · answer #8 · answered by uncle J 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Science itself proves that there had to be intelligence in order for a living cell or DNA to have been made so intricately.
2007-01-10 07:11:24 · answer #9 · answered by spareo1 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
There is no evidence for it so its just as bad as any other. Or have you found some?
2007-01-10 07:03:34 · answer #10 · answered by fourmorebeers 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋