TheBlaze Books Give You More!

CommentsDisplaying CreationScience752's 10 most recent comments.

• Science and the GOP

  November 24, 2012 at 6:50pm

  In reply to CreationScience752.

  Well said Faithful Fisherman, and will do! Thank you for your support!
  And thank you for your support as well Occamssword!

• Science and the GOP

  November 23, 2012 at 9:23pm

  In reply to CreationScience752.

  Nope, I am just making the point that there is a difference between observational science and historical science. What I do is observational science. Since you are an engineer, you do observational science as well. However, you will here many people make the claim that we wouldn’t be able to build the space shuttle and develop other advanced technology without the theory of evolution. Now THAT’S a fallacy. I am a successful engineer despite the fact that I do not believe in evolution.

  And of course, technology “evolves,” but it is constantly being designed and re-designed. If we were to apply the theory of evolution to technology, we would wait forever for stuff to build itself by random chance.

• Science and the GOP

  November 23, 2012 at 2:44pm

  It’s sad that very few people understand the difference between observational science and historical science. I have 2 degrees in engineering: a bachelors in mechanical engineering, and a masters in aeronautical engineering. I work in a research laboratory. The science I do is observational science.

  The type of science that develops theories about the past is historical science. I encourage everyone to read this article http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v7/n1/science-bible and then check out that website in general. Creation scientists use the same evidence as evolutionists. Yet, if you are legitimately willing to explore creation science, you will find that the evidence overwhelmingly supports the Bible.

  http://www.answersingenesis.org
  http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v7/n4/ten-best-evidences