Quote
Quote
Maybe I wasn't clear. Let's say you have a painting in front of you. It is a moderately complex watercolor for example. I don't paint (except houses) so I may realize that a talented person painted the watercolor but not have a clue as to how the artist did it. So, I call on a specialist who can point out what the artist did by using clues left behind like brush strokes and color patterns...things like that. If I then asked another specialist about the painting, I might get some differing details because that expert's experience and knowledge is a little different from the first expert.
I don't know about you, but when a string of people professing to be experts tell me a beautiful work of art is the result of the canvass setting out in the weather (and they can't even agree on which type of weather), I'm going to look for someone who has a clue. Maybe someone who knows the artist; maybe someone who wrote about the artist.
Thank you for showing the true "creationist" debate style a la Hovind by misrepresenting what I am saying. I said I acknowledge that God made the universe, the same as I would acknowledge an artist painted the work of art. We just differ in our conclusions on the methodology used by God to create this work.

You still need to provide more evidence that your conclusions concerning the methodology are correct.

A faith that connot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets. -- Arthur C. Clarke