Why We Know there is NO Evidence for Creationism

A creationist sent me this as evidence FOR creationism.

> The laboratoryexperiments related to theories on the origin of life have
> not even remotely approached the synthesis of life from non-life, and
> the extremely limited results have depended on laboratory conditions
> that are artificially imposed and extremely improbable.
> The extreme improbability of these conditions and the
> relatively insignificant results apparently show that
> life did not emerge by the process that evolutionists
> postulate." - Duane Gish, Ph.D.

I wanted to emphasize why this is NOT evidence FOR Biblical creationism. At most it is evidence against abiogenesis research.

Allow me to take the position of the Raellians.

Raellians are a group of about 30,000 people, primarily based in France, who are atheists. They also do not believe in evolution.

Instead they believe that Earth is sort of a giant science project for a group of aliens. The aliens create new life forms in their laboratories and place those experiments on Earth as sort of a safety precaution - a way to test those "designs".

In some cases, such as with the dinosaurs, the experiments were very beneficial because the dinosaurs went amok. They were killed by the aliens as a result.

Evidence FOR Raellianism in comparison to Biblical creationism:

1. It makes sense to have a laboratory for doing such experiments. To simply release all sorts of new life forms in your own planet without testing them in a "laboratory" is precisely the sort of thing that human engineers would do.

2. Many people see alien spaceships. In fact millions of people believe that they have been abducted by aliens for scientific testing. This is completely consistent with Raellianism.

3. Raellians can explain the increasing complexity in the fossil record. It simply reflects advances in their ability to create life. Biblical creationism cannot explain this.

4. Raellians can explain the biogeography of life. For example they can explain why kangaroos are only found in Australia. That's where the "prototypes" were released. Biblical creationism cannot explain this because the Flood account, if true, should have created a genetic bottleneck centered around Mt. Ararat. We don't see that.

5. Raellians can explain the mass extinctions that we have seen throughout history. In each case they came in and did a sort of "reset" of their experiments. Biblical creationism believes that there was only ONE global catastrophe and that one wouldn't have caused so many extinctions.

6. Raellians can explain the Cambrian Explosion. That's when they first discovered how to "build" multi-cellular animals.

Raellians really have at least as good, and generally a better explanation, for EVERYTHING we see in nature than does Biblical creationism.

There is the problem of how the aliens came into existence. But Raellians can simply wave their arms in the air and say that conditions are very different on the home planet of the aliens and life forms there all of the time through natural processes.

You can't prove them wrong. Of course that means that their basic beliefs are non-scientific. But that's also something true of Biblical creationism. It can't be falsified either.

While I'm not an actual Raellian, I can't think of a single piece of scientific evidence that would make someone prefer Biblical creationism over what Raellians believe.

So any evidence FOR creationism must be something that shows Biblical creationism as a preferred alternative to both evolution and to Raellianism. An example of such a piece of evidence would be an out-of-place fossil, such as a kangaroo, in the area around Mt. Ararat. That is precisely the sort of thing that the Biblical account of the flood would make someone expect to see and would also, at the same time, be almost impossible for both Raellianism and evolution to explain.

There is NO such evidence.

That's one of the reasons that we can say with complete and total confidence that there is NO scientific evidence FOR creationism.