A big problem for Evolution?

[Tisthammerw]

Originally Posted by Reach

No, you can't provide any evidence for the existance of something that is supernatural; i.e. cannot be studied naturally within our system.

Why think this is true? I have yet to see any viable argument for the belief that there cannot be evidence for the supernatural.

Evidence for the existence of God (like evolution) are typically in the form of inference to the best explanation. Take for instance the impossibility of an infinite past. If the past is finite (say, 10 to 20 billion years starting from the big bang) then the universe began to exist, and since anything that begins to exist requires a case, something must have caused it. Because space-time itself began to exist, the agency that created the universe must transcend space and time. Technically this isn't a proof of God's existence, but it's good practical evidence. How many atheists believe there was a creator of the universe that transcends space and time? The "best explanation" atheists have (when compared to theism) is usually that the universe existed forever, but this does not seem like a plausible belief.

Other pieces of evidence could be used, e.g. God is the best explanation for the complex order in the universe (e.g. sophisticated mathematical patterns imprinted into nature), the existence of objective moral values, and the existence of the human soul (the soul must exist if free will exists).

I'm aware evolution is, in itself an 'uncomplete theory'. That doesn't mean just because you can find specific examples of things evolution cannot explain, or that we have not observed yet that evolution is not true.

I agree. The point I've been making however is that the evidence is not all one-sided in favor of either theory. There's definitely a lot to be said for evolution, but too many ignore that creationist theory does make some testable and successful predictions of data. (This does not mean creationist theory is correct, however.)