# Top Ten Scientific Proofs of Creation **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 19, 2012, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231 "2012-04-19T02:09:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![supermegaman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df705f/32.png) [@supermegaman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/supermegaman)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/61 "2012-04-19T15:30:35Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Yeah. > Do you now understand what the word “theory” means when it comes to science? Yeah, it’s scientists with their fingers in their ears going, “la, la, la. I don’t wanna hear nothin about a loving god! la, la, la” ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/62 "2012-04-19T15:31:12Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > “probabilistically” is that even a word? Google is, in fact, not broken. If you’re discussing probability but don’t know the word “[probabilistic](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/probabilistic)”, you probably should stop discussing probability. > [@supermegaman](#): > > you’re comparing 13 cards to ten quadrillion quadrillion possible chemcial combinations. Are you unfamiliar with the principle of argument by analogy? The point which was made is correct. To say nothing of the fact that chemical assortments, bonding, dynamics (etc) are not random. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/63 "2012-04-19T15:32:44Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > Yeah, it’s scientists with their fingers in their ears going, “la, la, la. I don’t wanna hear nothin about a loving god! la, la, la” [My Name]Yeah-I can feel the love from here.[/My Name] ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/64 "2012-04-19T15:33:38Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > Yeah, it’s scientists with their fingers in their ears going, “la, la, la. I don’t wanna hear nothin about a loving god! la, la, la” _Sigh_ So, do you go to the doctors (the experts) when you get sick, or do you go to the local Shaman? If it’s to the doctors, please explain why. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/65 "2012-04-19T15:34:36Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > Yeah, it’s scientists with their fingers in their ears going, “la, la, la. I don’t wanna hear nothin about a loving god! la, la, la” Yeah, science is out to get theism. It’s not that it’s the single most powerful analytic, investigative and predictive system ever developed by humanity. Scientists defined the structure of scientific inquiry just to fuck with your particular mythology. Tell you what, let’s perform an experiment. Spit into one hand, pray into the other. See which one fills up first. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/66 "2012-04-19T15:35:24Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > “probabilistically” is that even a word? Yes. You can look it up [here](http://www.thefreedictionary.com/probabilistically) if you’re unsure of its meaning. > [@supermegaman](#): > > you’re argument is cute though. you’re comparing 13 cards to ten quadrillion quadrillion possible chemcial combinations. Did you think that up all by your lonesome? Actually, the odds of your getting that particular 13-card bridge hand are much less than you probably imagine: in fact, less than one in a sextillion. You’d have to be dealing yourself about _one thousand bridge hands per second for the entire estimated lifetime of the universe_ (something under 15 billion years according to science) to have a reasonable likelihood of getting that particular bridge hand by random chance. So yes, it’s quite a good analogy to the “incredible unlikeliness” of the occurrence of life in the universe that you’re trying to argue for. In both cases, the fact that a particular outcome is probabilistically very unlikely is offset by the fact that the occurrence of **SOME** outcome is **not** very unlikely. If you understand that basic point, then we can move on to discussing just how unlikely the formation of living organisms somewhere sometime in the entire lifetime of the universe might be. ---
**Author:** ![StusBlues](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@StusBlues](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/StusBlues)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/67 "2012-04-19T15:36:01Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > Yeah, it’s scientists with their fingers in their ears going, “la, la, la. I don’t wanna hear nothin about a loving god! la, la, la” No, sir. A theory is a logical construct, supported by evidence, that is used to guide further research. The problem with Intelligent Design is that it doesn’t serve as any kind of a research framework, nor is it supported by, or derived from, evidence. Further, in point of fact, a majority of people involved in STEM fields do profess religion to some degree. Finding comfort in a loving deity is not antithetical to empirically based research. ---
**Author:** ![supermegaman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df705f/32.png) [@supermegaman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/supermegaman)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/68 "2012-04-19T15:40:24Z")
look, it’s been fun and all. You are absolutely free to believe whatever you like. I would hope you would offer me the same freedom. I believe there is a loving God called Jesus Christ who loves you and wants to know you. It’s nothing more fanciful than believing in a more advanced, higher-evolved being if that helps you accept it better. I think that being loved me and created me and you as well. He wants to know you. It’s really that simple. I didn’t start this debate to bring hatred into your afternoon. You are loved by someone greater than yourself. We are not alone in this universe. There IS a hope and a purpose to your life and I really hope you find that peace in your heart. Now who wants to go into a lottery pool with me? I’m buying tonight! ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/69 "2012-04-19T15:41:34Z")
Fun fact: The “Top 10 Scientific Proofs of Creation” are neither Scientific, nor Proofs. But there are ten of them, so they’ve got that going for them. Look, **super** , in all seriousness, I was a Creationist in high school. I understand the appeal. But please trust me, you can believe in a loving God without checking your brain in at the door. Most major church denominations like the Roman Catholics and mainline Protestants are comfortable recognizing the scientific validity of evolution. As my momma would say, “use the brains God gave you.” ---
**Author:** ![Sicks\_Ate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Sicks\_Ate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sicks_Ate)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/70 "2012-04-19T15:42:36Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > look, it’s been fun and all. You are absolutely free to believe whatever you like. I would hope you would offer me the same freedom. I believe there is a loving God called Jesus Christ who loves you and wants to know you. It’s nothing more fanciful than believing in a more advanced, higher-evolved being if that helps you accept it better. I think that being loved me and created me and you as well. He wants to know you. It’s really that simple. > > I didn’t start this debate to bring hatred into your afternoon. You are loved by someone greater than yourself. We are not alone in this universe. There IS a hope and a purpose to your life and I really hope you find that peace in your heart. > > Now who wants to go into a lottery pool with me? I’m buying tonight! Well, I know that I’ve decided to go to church during lunch. By ‘church’ I mean ‘Fazoli’s’. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/71 "2012-04-19T15:43:02Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > look, it’s been fun and all. You are absolutely free to believe whatever you like. So we are free not to believe the nonsense you’ve posted? Good deal. > [@supermegaman](#): > > I would hope you would offer me the same freedom. I believe there is a loving God called Jesus Christ who loves you and wants to know you. It’s nothing more fanciful than believing in a more advanced, higher-evolved being if that helps you accept it better. I think that being loved me and created me and you as well. He wants to know you. It’s really that simple. No thank you. > [@supermegaman](#): > > I didn’t start this debate to bring hatred into your afternoon. Then why the inflammatory rhetoric? > [@supermegaman](#): > > You are loved by someone greater than yourself. We are not alone in this universe. There IS a hope and a purpose to your life and I really hope you find that peace in your heart. It’s fine that you believe that, but I don’t need any of that flavor-aid. > [@supermegaman](#): > > Now who wants to go into a lottery pool with me? I’m buying tonight! You should spend your money on some actual science books. ---
**Author:** ![manila](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e5b9ba/32.png) [@manila](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manila)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/72 "2012-04-19T15:43:03Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > Yeah, it’s scientists with their fingers in their ears going, “la, la, la. I don’t wanna hear nothin about a loving god! la, la, la” Why does your loving god hate amputees? ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/73 "2012-04-19T15:43:28Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > Yeah, it’s scientists with their fingers in their ears going, “la, la, la. I don’t wanna hear nothin about a loving god! la, la, la” I want to hear about a loving god…please show me in any realistic way how the god of Abraham can be considered loving. To me he appears to be a petty little murderous rat bastard in all the books that were written about him. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/74 "2012-04-19T15:43:51Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > look, it’s been fun and all. You are absolutely free to believe whatever you like. I would hope you would offer me the same freedom. I believe there is a loving God called Jesus Christ who loves you and wants to know you. It’s nothing more fanciful than believing in a more advanced, higher-evolved being if that helps you accept it better. I think that being loved me and created me and you as well. He wants to know you. It’s really that simple. > > I didn’t start this debate to bring hatred into your afternoon. You are loved by someone greater than yourself. We are not alone in this universe. There IS a hope and a purpose to your life and I really hope you find that peace in your heart. That’s fine that you believe it. It’s very possible you have a good reason to believe it- perhaps something you’ve seen or experienced (or you were taught as a young child). But for me to believe it, I have to have a reason. And so far, I don’t. Plenty of people tell me what I should believe, and mostly their “testimony” conflicts with each other. So the only way I can figure out which might be right is what the evidence points to. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/75 "2012-04-19T15:44:30Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Googling various phrases from the OP, it appears that people have been copy-and-pasting this nonsense word-for-word since at least 2008. So you’re saying it hasn’t evolved? Maybe he’s onto something! > [@supermegaman](#): > > oh, do tell how the universe works then? because I see a “theory” that says chemicals exploded, shot out in every direction, grouped together, reformed itself into planetoids, cooled off, grew plants and an atmosphere and life just decided to shoot forth and party! Surprise: another guy trying to debunk evolution and The Big Bang without the foggiest idea of what they are or what a theory is. It must be Thursday. > [@Skammer](#): > > Fun fact: The “Top 10 Scientific Proofs of Creation” are neither Scientific, nor Proofs. Talk amongst yourselves. I’m getting verklempt. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/76 "2012-04-19T15:47:08Z")
I should add (as you can see by the responses to your most recent post) that your evangelistic witness is not helped by advocating scientific ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/77 "2012-04-19T15:51:14Z")
Let me try to help you out a bit here. I was raised with more or less the same beliefs you’re espousing here. I’m still a Christian, but the more I learn about science, the more I realize that creationism actually belittles God, that it puts him in a box and limits him. One of the major aspects of God is that he is a force of order and harmony, so why would he behave in a way that contradicts the order he created? Or, even more interestingly, that his creation was in someway “complete” at one single moment in the past, for a non-temporal being. That is, the great realization that really helps understand why evolution is actually more consistent with the nature of God is that creation wasn’t a single event, it is an ongoing event. A song isn’t “created” with the onset of the first note, the entire piece is an act of creation. And it is in that sense that limiting God to a single event of creation belittles him to try to put him and our place in his creation into a manner that we think we can understand. > [@supermegaman](#): > > oh, I’m open to debate. I find it interesting that it takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does in a creator. Probability, my fiends. (friends) Your “theory”, (which it still is) of evolution requires an astronomical amount of things lining itself up into neat little rows in order to work. First of all, as others have said, you’re not really understanding what theory means. Theory, as we use it in common vernacular is more akin to a scientific hypothesis. In science, theory is a completely different and much stronger term. Law isn’t above (or, for that matter below) a theory, it’s a different concept altogether. I encourage you to look into it and understand it because, frankly, confusing it comes across very poorly and won’t do well in convincing people you know what your’e talking about. > [@](#): > > The sun has to be the right type, it has to be the correct distance away. The earth has to spin the correct speed, it has to have water, oxygen, have a magnetic field, that magnetic field has to be the correct strength, it has to have a moon, that moon must be the correct distance from the earth. There must be trees, plants, some sort of food source for whatever life springs forth and it must be there before that life gets there. Where did those seeds come from? That magical comet or asteroid planted them, right? On and on and on, conditions had to line up perfectly, no, PERFECTLY, in order for life to even be POSSIBLE, let alone probable and abundant and varied. If you believe all of that happened on its own, we’ll, we’re just the luckiest folks living in the whole wide universe! I’m going to play the lottery! But here’s the point you’re missing, the chances that any one person is going to win the lottery are tiny, and yet someone always does. From their perspective, it seems like a miracle that they won it, that it must have some significance. But we can’t necessarily assign any meaning to it because everyone else who played didn’t win. The difference with life is that the lottery losers, all the other lifeless planets, don’t get to question why they don’t have life because they don’t have life to question it. It’s a tautology that anywhere life exists is going to be ideal for that life to exist. And so you see, the existence of life doesn’t actually say anything about the existence or non-existence of God. If I’m going to argue that, that with trillions of chances among the various planets in the universe, even extremely remote combinations of conditions are likely to occur. But, again, that’s the of the point. Science isn’t the method for examining or understanding the nature of God any more than religion is a method for examing or understanding the nature of the physical laws of the universe. It’s like using a measuring tape to explain how colorful something is. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/78 "2012-04-19T15:52:59Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > look, it’s been fun and all. You are absolutely free to believe whatever you like. I would hope you would offer me the same freedom. I believe there is a loving God called Jesus Christ who loves you and wants to know you. It’s nothing more fanciful than believing in a more advanced, higher-evolved being if that helps you accept it better. I think that being loved me and created me and you as well. He wants to know you. It’s really that simple. Indeed. If He’s God, and He created me, then He knows where to find me. And please, Jesus, have the courtesy to call directly. I’m _really_ tired of hearing sales pitches from your downline reps. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/79 "2012-04-19T15:54:10Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > And please, Jesus, have the courtesy to call directly. I’m _really_ tired of hearing sales pitches from your downline reps. That’s what you get with MLM. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2012, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231/80 "2012-04-19T15:55:13Z")
> [@supermegaman](#): > > I believe there is a loving God called Jesus Christ who loves you and wants to know you. It’s nothing more fanciful than believing in a more advanced, higher-evolved being if that helps you accept it better. So you claim that there is a magical being that created the universe in contradiction to all the known laws of physics, created “sin” ex nihilo and organized a system to punish His children with literally Hellish torments, for eternity, out of His limitless Love… and then sacrificed His only son to Himself in order to change a rule that He created, in his omnibenevolent omnipotence. Then you claim that this being is not more fanciful than carbon-based organisms which have simply been around for a bit longer than humans? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-ten-scientific-proofs-of-creation/619231.md?page=5)