Thursday, February 14, 2013

Is an atheist website backing down to creationists? RationalWiki has yet to accept our debate offer to debate the 15 questions for evolutionists

Our Question Evolution! Campaign group is once again throwing down the creation vs. evolution debate gauntlet to the website RationalWiki.   We repeat our challenge to the website of RationalWiki as far as debating the 15 questions for evolutionists.

Once again, the 15 questions for evolutionists of the Question Evolution! Campaign is showing how foolish and inept evolutionists are.  The website RationalWiki has yet to respond to our debate offer to debate the 15 questions for evolutionists. The YouTube Christian video maker Shockofgod or his chat room debate moderator VivaYehshua have not reported being contacted.  The debate offer was given on  February 12, 2013.  You can read about it at:  RationalWiki is asked to debate the 15 questions for evolutionists

These questions have totally stumped evolutionists. If you don't believe me, watch how ineptly some of YouTube's most prominent evolutionists tried to handle the 15 questions for evolutionists and how they totally embarrassed themselves:   15 Questions Evolutionists STILL can't answer!

Things are definitely not looking good for evolutionists.  2013 is going to be the WORST year ever in the history of Darwinism bar none.

15 Questions Evolutionists STILL can't answer!

New discoveries disprove Darwinism

15 questions evolutionists hate: Live dialogue - Shockofgod

Creation Ministries International website resources
Creation Ministries International website

Creation vs. evolution answers

Question Evolution! Campaign

15 questions for evolutionists

Responses to the 15 Questions: part 1 - Questions 1-3

Responses to the 15 Questions: part 2 - Questions 4–8

Responses to the 15 Questions: part 2 - Questions 9-15

Refuting evolution

Evidence for Christianity

Creation Ministries International Question Evolution! Videos


  1. 15 Questions creationists won't accept the answers to. The only question unanswered is,'Did God create evolution?'

    1. Ian Dell,

      Are you willing to have a debate centered around the 15 questions for evolutionists (see: )
      via a recorded oral debate which would be distributed to tens of thousands of people.

      If you are confident in your evolutionary beliefs, please make the necessary arrangements via this free chat room:,89538844 You can make the necessary arrangements with the chat room moderators Shockofgod or VivaYehshua. Alternatively, you can email Shockofgod via his YouTube email at

      If you want to know more about the debate, any and all questions should be directed to Shockofgod or VivaYehshua

      There will be no future communication with you via this blog until you accept this debate offer and carry through with the debate.

  2. I have enjoyed and it has helped me overcome the biases built intome by so many years of liberal schooling and assorted bunk. I have been active on many blog sites trying to promote the creationist point of view and they shoot me down some of the times. My blog is and I have a section on evolution VS evil-lution. I would love to see this debate take place. However I need more assistance and while bouncing around I came to a thing on RationalWiki which pretty well summarizes the problems I have countering them. If you would be able to help me reference some more articles on your site that I can use to counter the following paragraphs which they seem to spout from memory: "The scientific method is an epistemological system for deriving and developing knowledge. It is considered the best method for making useful and practical additions to human knowledge about the physical world, and has resulted in the technological leaps made since it developed in the western world.[1] At the core of the method is the idea that the value of a hypothesis, theory, or concept is best determined by its ability to make falsifiable predictions that can be tested against an empirical reality.

    The scientific method means that supernatural entities or concepts that are meaningless or logically contradictory cannot be included in a scientific hypothesis (not least because you can't put a sample of a god in a test-tube). Consequently, when carrying out investigations scientists assume a position of methodological naturalism." I would certainly appreciate any help here if possible.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.