[AUTHOR'S NOTE: This is (I think) the fifth installment in the series originally published several years ago, during my tenure as the Atlanta Creationism Examiner. Minor editing and re-formatting  to accommodate the differences between the old and new platform have been done on every article, but the original content has otherwise remained unchanged. ] Supernatural evidence We have examined the few real "facts" of evolution. Then we reviewed the conjecture about evolution expressed in the theories of Charles Darwin. Then I suggested an alternative to Darwin's theory of natural selection (evolution theory) which I have called Iterative Creation (IC). And of course, we talked about DNA as a unique and dynamically generated source code for the creation of a new living organism. The remaining question left unasked thus far: is evolution theory clearly superior to IC?  Are the theories equally unprovable, or does IC actually hold some advantage over evolution theory? The only way evolution theory can be considered superior to IC is by resorting to scientism. By asserting that evidence somehow "belongs" to science would imply IC can't use the same evidence, presumably because a different standard for scientific method is applied to each theory. At the heart of any scientific argument against any form of creation lies the postulate that a supernatural God is simply impossible to believe. This is a very important point. God is derisively referred to “an invisible man in the sky” by my atheist friends, as a legend or fairy tale. Tales of NDEs and other … [Read more...]