Creation is perhaps a model but not a theory. Evolution is however a good theory.
SJ: You hear Evolutionists say that Evolution ties the natural sciences together. It
ties them together because it's the model in which the secular scientists
use to provide context for their observations.
Nope, it is because the theory explains so well the observed data. Creation does not have that to offer.
> My views are based on the information available to me at the time. If
> someone has information that can prove the macroevelutionary
> theory, I would
> be interested.
SJ " I've proposed to this list in the past that nature isn't creative and thus
cannot be used to explain the origin of complex organisms.
Argument from personal incredulity. You surely can do better than that.
SJ: Before claiming that Evolution is a fact, someone ought to make the effort to demonstrate
that Evolution is even possible in the first place by producing it.
Still ignoring all the evidence?
SJ: Evolution is a simple concept: mutation plus selection equals the ability to
create new complexity. So, where's the example of Evolution from those
thousands of generations of fruit flies, or those millions of generations of
synthetic creatures than can be produce on a computer?
Volvox: Single to multi-cellular organisms under the pressure of predation.
See what happens when you ignore the myriad of evidence supporting evolution in favor of your own strawman arguments?