Is their any PROOF of creationism not misinformed falsehood, but stand alone evidence? ?

Question

Is their any PROOF of creationism not misinformed falsehood, but stand alone evidence? ?

Answer 1

Yes, the universe exists.

Answer 2

Creationism is pseudo-science at its finest.

Answer 3

Nothing whatsoever.

Answer 4

Yes, me.  I was created, like all of man.  I'm sitting here breathing and co-creating with everyone, I have been ever since I was born, so have you.  :)

I don't call it anything in particular, except Life.  Personally speaking, I call whatever created me and all of life 'God or Energy.'  However, I don't expect everyone else to do the same, it just works for me.

Yes, I was created, and I am one of the many 'proofs of evidence' that creation and Life does indeed exist.  A good example would be if I stood beside a tree and then asked someone else what proof do they have that trees exist, when I'm standing right next to one, and then ask them if they could prove it to me?  :)  We have eyes that see don't we?  :)  Pretty silly....

We needn't look any further than our own nose.  :)  It's that simple....

Answer 5

It's called faith. Seeing is not always believing

Answer 6

No but... think of it this way,

A giraffe. You think evolution would work for it? every time it went for a drink of water it's brain would blow out! There is a possibility that evolution exists, but ... not a lot of giraffes would be alive today if there brains would splatter.

But I respect your view.

Answer 7

Why does the evidence have to stand alone?  Why can't it simply reside within my holy emotions?

Answer 8

No thats why people Have faith in God not an understanding of how he did it, they just think the bible said it so it happened  

Answer 9

If by "creationism" you mean that there is some sort of eternal creative being behind the universe, then try this out:

Marco-evolution suggests that, at some point, two very important things happened. One is that life sprang from non-life. The "raw materials" for the universe are very non-living (hydrogen, nitrogen, etc.). Macro-evolution suggests that somehow these elements combined in some way, and produced life (even if it was a very early example of life).

Second, all this happened by random chance over billions of years. If you take apart a watch, throw all the pieces into a paper bag, and slosh it around, at what point do you think you'd get an assembled watch? Ten minutes? A year? A billion years? Likely, never.

So, as a "proof" for an eternal creative being, we might say that a well-organized thing (like the universe) would likely not exist by chance, and that we have never witnessed life springing from non-life. So, a creative eternal "God" would be able to accomplish both of these things.

If by "proof" you mean "test it in a lab today," then no. Concepts like those ones don't count. But, do you really want to reduce all of life to what we can observe in a science lab?

Answer 10

Their mechanism for "creation" is an all powerful deity, which predicts *anything*. There is no possible counterexample, which means creationism predicts nothing. It is well established in science that an hypothesis which fails to make a prediction also explains nothing. Therefore, creationism is not even an hypothesis, not science at all.

Answer 11

I'm still looking for proof of atheism, not misinformed falsehood but stand alone evidence.  The closest I ever came to getting actual evidence here is thumbs down.  Just because apes and man can both do thumbs down isn't conclusive proof that they're related.

Answer 12

No.

Most creationist arguments either critique small aspects of evolutionary theory from over a century ago (pepper moths, old hominid fakes, death bed conversion of Darwin). Many create emotional arguments against "Darwinism" or the perceived implications of evolutionary theory (eugenics, racism, blah blah).

The remainder of creationism falls under the notion that something cannot be explained by empirical means (the "science is useless" argument) and that it is the undefinable product of a supernatural intelligence. "Irreducible complexity" and "intelligent design" are the most common example of this tactic.

Answer 13

I'd like real proof of evolution...not something strummed up from centuries ago...but something right now in my face type thing

But We all can not get everything we want...so we get what we need

Answer 14

Nope.  I have never, not once, seen a creationist offer evidence FOR creation rather than (misinformed and jjuvenile) quibbles about naturalistic explanations.

Answer 15

There isn't a rock that says "God was here" or anything like that, it's all about the evidence. Creationists and evolutionists both look at the SAME EVIDENCE.

A creationists sees sedimentary rock layers, and he sees perfectly well that it was cause by a global flood, with the layers of dirt and rocks forming as the waters calmed and receded.

An evolutionists sees the same layers, and he sees that it was caused by millions and millions of years of deposits and erosion.

Both have perfectly logical beliefs, they just have different presuppositions as to what the evidence is interpreted as.

Answer 16

no

Answer 17

Is their any PROOF of eveolution not misinformed falsehood, but stand alone evidence? ?

Answer 18

No, how could there be?  If there was, then everyone would accept it because it would be fact.

Answer 19

nope

Answer 20

At least 10 accounts PER "proof" of evolution, and always guaranteed to fit the evidence much more precisely.

Would you like to discuss specifics?