Creationist pseudo-scientists do have a right to be heard ... in a comedy club!

They say that evolution is "only" a theory.

Gravitation is a theory. So is electricity.

Experiments :

1. Jump off a multistorey building and see if the theory of gravity works.

2. Place a metal fork in the power socket. While still holding onto thefork, turn the power on and see if the theory of electricity works.

We evolutionists demand equal time at Creation Science fairs asking for volunteers to perform our experiments 1 & 2.

We evolutionists also want equal time teaching in the pulpit at Creationist churches.

What is good for the goose is also good for the gander.

Creationists are the Luddites of the Fundamentalist Dark Age.


1. All truth is God's truth. Truth outside the bible (eg science) impactson how the bible is to be understood. All error is not God's truth ... even if it is found in Genesis!

2. The real issue is fundamentalist Christianity vs science by all other people (including other Christians)

2a. Science works for ALL people but creationism only works forfundamentalist Christians. Creationism does not work for an atheist / Moslem/ Buddhist / Catholics etc2

b.One does not "do science" by looking up the bible! Creationism is about the defence of a fundamentalist view on the bible more than anything remotely concerned with science. It places the bible above God as the final authority.

3. Science is not theology. Theology is not science. Pseudo-science is not science.

3a. The biggest lie of creationism is that "modern science" has"antitheistic presuppositions".

3b. Modern science is opposed to pseudo-science.

3c. Fundamentalist creationism as falsely claims to represent ALL Christians. One of the biggest Christian denominations, Catholicism, has noproblem with evolution or an old earth. Fundamentalist creationists exclude all Catholics! Fundamentalist creationism is not taught in Catholic Schools.


Read the Australian Academy of Science "Statement on Creationism":


Statement on creationism/intelligent design

One of the fiercest moral debates witnessed in Europe in the second half of the 19th century was raised by the theory of the evolution of species set out by Charles Darwin in his Origin of Species. The theory challenged most established views on the place of humans in the cosmos, on three fundamental points:

a.. It suggested that Homo sapiens, in common with all extant species, arose not by special creation but by evolutionary development from simpler forms of life.

b.. It suggested that evolution was not guided by some divinity or purpose, but by rules which govern the inheritance of physical characteristics. These rules were not seen as having any moral content, and the theory of evolution did not therefore acknowledge a moral component to the pattern of life.

c.. The theory of evolution therefore questioned whether Homo sapiens holds a supreme place in nature.

In Western countries, the debate persisted longest in the United States of America where the theory of evolution clashed with widely held fundamentalist religious views, and in many centres within the US the value of the theory has never been acknowledged.

The explanatory power of the theory of evolution has been recognised, however, by all biologists, and their work has expanded and developed it. In Australia, as in all western countries, the theory of evolution has for many years been taught as the most powerful theory available of the origins of the diversity of biology.

Over the last 10-20 years, the fundamentalist rejection of the theory has gained momentum in the United States, and the same thrust has been evident in parts of Australia. The anti-evolution thrust argues two major points:

a.. that the theory of evolution is flawed; and

b.. that a sense of balance in the teaching of the scientific basis of life requires that equal consideration be given to the creationist view, that sees the origin of the diversity of life in the specific intention of the Deity.

The following points summarise the view of the Australian Academy of Science on this issue:

a.. All scientific ideas are theories, imperfect and subject to test. That the theory of evolution is imperfect, and still the subject of study and modification, affirms that the theory is part of science. Many attempts to modify and expand the theory have been successful, showing (since Darwin's day) the gene-basis of inheritance, the basis of gene-reproduction in the double helix structure of DNA, the 'genetic drift' basis of the origin of breeds, and so on. Many challenges to the fundamentals of the theory have failed empirical test. The theory has attracted enormous empirical testing and remains one of the most powerful of scientific ideas.

b.. The creationist account of the origin of life has been and remains an important idea in human culture. However it is not a scientific idea. That is, it is not open to empirical test. It is an article of religious faith.

c.. The creationist account of the origin of life is not therefore appropriate to a course in the science of biology, and the claim that it is a viable scientific explanation of the diversity of life does not warrant support.

d.. The Academy sees no objection to the teaching of creationism in schools as part of a course in dogmatic or comparative religion, or in some other non-scientific context. There are no grounds, however, for requiring that creationism/intelligent design be taught as part of a science course.


"Creationism is not the alternative to Evolution - ignorance is."

Visit No Answers in Genesis!