Reader Response:
Here is a comment, left in its uncensored form, from one of our apparently evolutionist readers self-identified as IkeSDSU from 5/17/2012.
Ha ha ha, you creationists, just keep on burying your head in the sand. If you can't see it, it isn't true right? People that are real scientists don't believe your crap and you campain is just waste of time. It will never be taken seriously since you will never let it be analysed using the scientific method. "Because it says so in this book" doesn't hold up. Just stay ignorant, you are only hurting yourself as the world passes you by.
Here is an answer:
So, Ike, have you used the scientific method to confirm or disconfirm either the Bible or the textbooks proclaiming evolution? Do you believe evolution because “it says so in your text books” or have you performed actual experiments? Somewhat hypocritical, don’t you think? Particularly when evolutionist scientists consistently have to admit they are wrong and that evolution just does not have the evidence to back it up step-by-step.
Ike, let’s look at the scientific method and evolution. This is what the majority of the 15 Questions for Evolutionists are about. To follow the scientific method you observe something, form a hypothesis, and perform experiments attempting to prove or disprove your hypothesis (confirm or disconfirm). Once you achieve consistent results you either reject your hypothesis as disproven or you refine it to the conditions of the experiment confirming it. From here more experiments are done to confirm your refined hypothesis in order to disprove it, or confirm and possibly further refine it. Once this point is achieved, others also conduct experiments and if the results consistently confirm your hypothesis, it may be advanced to become a scientific theory; at which point it continues to be critically tested by others and either becomes accepted or rejected.
We’ll look at one simple example. Is it scientifically established that any creature of any kind has ever been witnessed to reproduce a creature of another kind as required in the General Theory of Evolution? Has it ever been observed in nature? Has it ever been observed in a laboratory?
The scientifically observed and tested answer to this question is, ‘”No, no living creature has ever been witnessed to reproduce a different kind of creature as required by the General Theory of Evolution.”
Due to this scientific observation that living creatures are always, one hundred percent of the time, reproduced by another living creature of the same kind, the General Theory of Evolution (often referred to as goo-to-you, pond scum-to-plumber, microbes-to-microbiologist, etc.) is dead in the water. The number one requirement for the General Theory of Evolution to be true has already been scientifically disproven by the scientific method.
By the way, there are the statements in a certain historical text that have been scientifically confirmed as accurate:
“And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind:...”
“..great whales, and every living creature that moves, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind:...”
“...bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.”
“...made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creeps on the earth after his kind: ...”
Ike, please show me your evidence confirmed by the scientific method where any of these statements of fact have been scientifically disconfirmed. Have any of these creatures been scientifically shown and confirmed to have brought forth any offspring that were not of their own kind? No, they have not. They have always been proven to bring forth offspring only after their own kind.
We have a text that in its original autograph is over 3,000 years old that is wholly consistent with testing and observation by the scientific method. This is opposed to your belief in the General Theory of Evolution which is here disproven by the same scientific method you claim we ignore.
So, Ike, who is playing ‘ostrich’ and burying their head in the sand?
By the way, Ike, would you like to actually attempt to answer one of the 15 Questions for Evolutionists?
