[net.origins] creation, not a creator

cb@hlwpc.UUCP (Carl Blesch) (05/08/85)

>>>  Creation science
>>>  is the scientific evidence for a creation, not a creator.
>>
>>Even if we accept that one can scientifically discuss a creation
>>without talking about the creator, there is no creation science.

I posed the following question to Walt Brown (director of ICR Midwest
and the author of the 100+ reasons for Creationism as posted by Ron
Kukuk):  If creation science is truly an objective science, why don't
any scientists who are non-theistic support it?  His answer was that
if you studied creation science, you would have to come to the realization
that there is a creator.  Seems to contradict the first statement above.

Carl Blesch