Pretty Clever Satire

I always like to ask where the evidence in favor of a New Earth Creation is, but I really haven't seen anything. If one sifts through answers in Genesis, one might realize it's more of a critique of method (and generally considered not a very good one, but that's another issue) than a presentation of data.

Still, if there was data, what would it look like?

There's a pretty clever parody of the discovery of an ancient dinosaur saddle which is worth checking out.

Of course, it spends a little bit of time mocking the "vegetarian dinosaur" theory, which is one of the weirdest pieces of apologetics I've ever seen (and I don't see the necessity of its tie in Genesis, though I'm sure there's a need for one if they're invoking it).

Anyway, I'm curious to see the arguments that Creationists do produce sometimes, just to see what is keeping people so attached to the position.

There are a few articles on AiG that I think provide a good summation of the data and method that Young Earth Creationists invoke.

The first is a critique of genetic relationships between chimps and humans. It's ending is a little cliched, invoking Gen. 1:26-27, but it's worth thinking about. There's no real new data here, but it's an interesting attempt to spin the genetics to support the position.

The second is on the flood Noah had to deal with. I'm surprised it doesn't invoke the Asian mythologies that are often encouraged as a way of demonstrating universality, but it focuses almost solely on the flood within the Bible and the Bible's consistency on the issue. The article is disappointing, but since I've been hearing a lot of discussion of the flood lately (since there are people talking about global warming, locally) I thought it was worth posting.

Of course, neither of these really present evidence in the scientific sense, gathered through experimentation. The first, especially, is really an attempt to present evidence in a way that makes their position seem plausible by the data that already exists.