The Scientific method Vs. The Creationist method (PIC)

[accadacca]

http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/2764/sciencevscreationismjd7.gif

[bbennett]

:lol8:

[Cirrus2000]

:lol8: :2thumbs:

[DiscGo]

:haha:

[stefan]

a flow-chart for clarification of the methods

[Sombeech]

:lol8: I think you forgot to include "Life starts as lightning strikes mud"

[JP]

:roflol: :roflol:

[stefan]

:lol8: I think you forgot to include "Life starts as lightning strikes mud"

so far this thread has only been about methods, not about details.

nevertheless, life is pretty damn amazing ... it's no wonder religions have sprung about glorifying its inception to a maker.

[jumar]

nevertheless, life is pretty damn amazing ... it's no wonder religions have sprung about glorifying its inception to a maker.
What is science's latest theory on how life began?

[rockgremlin]

nevertheless, life is pretty damn amazing ... it's no wonder religions have sprung about glorifying its inception to a maker.


concur.


I especially like the little half-moons and crosses circling the "ignore contradicting evidence" balloon. :lol8: Nice touch. :lol8:

[stefan]

What is science's latest theory on how life began?

well there is no one "theory" or standard model. there are a number of models often with common elements ... and there is the natural question of whether it (or some of it) began on earth or elsewhere.

though i DID just read somewhere that it might have started by cosmic rays impinging on a funky pothole in a slot canyon in southern utah. :wink:

or maybe that's just where canyoneers think "life" began.

[jumar]

though i DID just read somewhere that it might have started by cosmic rays impinging on a funky pothole in a slot canyon in southern utah.
That's the most plausible theory I've heard yet! :haha: