Quote Originally Posted by Ironside View Post
And that evaluation has already concluded that creationism is wrong, unless "God did it" is a valid argument. Occationally they do have a relevant point, but it's often clouded by either going into "you're wrong thus I'm right by default" or having no valid alternative explaination (after all, science is about trying to get the most correct answer, getting THE correct answer is impossible) or one that can easily be debunked by some more research on the subject.
Yes! The best way to proceed against creationism is to show that its claims have certainly been put to the test and falsified.

For example, young earth creationism's claim on the age of the earth has not held up very well against the testing. Is this not more convincing then saying creationism is not testable and occupies a whole other division than science?