Quote:

---

Evolutionists love to redefine things. Superstition is a belief (in this case) that is maintained despite the laws of nature or by faith in magic or chance.

---

Quote:

---

Whatever begins to exist must have a cause. Most of us have no problem accepting this principle. We assume its truth in virtually every aspect in our daily lives. Our experience always confirms it and never denies it. But surprisingly philosophers have been unable to prove its veracity.

Nevertheless, it has always been a fundamental first principle of philosophy and science that "from nothing, nothing comes", "being cannot come from non-being". Even the great sceptic David Hume, who argued that we could not prove the causal principle through ordinary means, still believed it to be true and thought a denial of it was absurd, "I never asserted so absurd a proposition that anything might arise without a cause."2

Surely it is more reasonable to hold to this premise than to believe that things pop into existence out of nothing and by nothing.

---

It's not really that surprising ... 'cause' is something semi-artificial, a bit like 'time' is.

Anyways, this is where the fun starts, because creationism seems to me pretty much like 'things popping out of nowhere'. It seems more likely to me that something comes from something else, be it smaller things, larger things or whatever. Creation itself implies making something. Creator or no creator, I think most of us here will agree that from nothing comes nothing, and most of the theories about the origin of life do not claim the opposite of this. Creationism does however.

Because; how can a God create matter? Magic or some kind of powers? Energy? Magical powers don't exist just like witchcraft, so that would be superstition.

You don't know how a God would do it, even if it could, but he would nevertheless make something from nothing? Sounds pretty unlikely to me, since nothing we know of in this world is created or 'came into existance' from nothing. And you are talking about our socalled 'assumptions'...?!

When we know enough about the building blocks used in the process of how life came to existance, then we come closer to where life's origin lies.

Edit and slightly off topic: That site jumps to some weird conclusions or am I wrong here?;

Quote:

---

Suppose you withdrew all the green books. How many books are there left in the library? There would still be an infinite number of books in the library even though we just withdrew an infinite number and found a way to get them home! Suppose you withdrew the books numbered 4,5,6...and so on. Now how many books are left? THREE! Something surely is wrong here! One time we subtract an infinite number of books and we're left with an infinite number; the next time we subtract an infinite number and we're left with three - a clear logical contradiction. Since our hypothesis leads to a contradiction, the hypothesis must be false - a library with an actual infinite number of books cannot exist.

---