THE SCIENTIFIC CREATION GAME
                        by Dr Pepper
                ----------------------------

Here's an opportunity to see how good you are at presenting the case
for scientific creation. That means using science, not faith. If you
have faith that God did everything, that's great for you but has
nothing to do with science.

HOW TO PLAY

Just write a series of statements suporting creationism with hard
evidence and sound logic.

Do not attempt to disprove evolution. We shall assume, for the purpose
of this game, that evolution has been disproven and that there is now
a total void on the subject of biological life. It is up to you to
fill it.

Your statements will be evaluated and assigned points. 10 points wins.

PROCEDURE

1. To enter the game, leave a post declaring your intention to play.
You may start making statements in that post if you like.

2. You will then have 60 days to make as many posts as you like with
statements for the game. If you do not make 10 points in those 60 days
you will have to start over.

3. All posts in the game should have CREATION SCIENCE GAME as the
subject line and contain only statements relevant to the game.
Anything else will not be counted.

WINNING

I'm self (un)employed so i can't give away cadillacs or trips to
Hawaii. But if you can get 10 points your name will go on a public
list of succesful creationism expounders, a list that is currently
empty. And i will send a $10 donation to the organization of your
choice.

SCORING

        Type of Statement                                       Points

Concise statement of the theory of creationism. This has
never been done before so this alone is worth the game.
Remember we are looking for something that can be tested.       10

Explanation of how totally independent dating methods agree
so well if the dates they show are wrong.                        5

Definition of a "kind" and the criteria for differentiating
them.                                                            4

Explanation of the "vapor canopy" theory. Address the
problems of atmospheric pressure and opacity.                    3

Explanation of the "hydrologic sorting" theory. Address the
conflict between the proposed physiological distribution
and the observed phylogenic distribution.                        3

Any testable prediction based on creationism                     3

Explanation of the modern distribution of lifeforms.             3

Explanation of the observed changes in population makeup
over time.                                                       3

Description of any experiment or field observation
supporting creationism.                                          2


Any quote from secondary sources.                               -1

Misunderstanding of any principle of physics                    -2

Appeal to supernatural entities. Such is outside the
framework of science.                                           -2

Misquoting or distorting someone's statement.                   -3

Nagative statement about evolution. That's not evidence
of creation.                                                    -4

Appeal to your own ignorance. "I don't see how else..."
is a description of your personal inadequacy, not
evidence for your position.                                     -4

Outright lie. It doesn't matter if you didn't know it
was a lie.                                                      -5

Use of argument already thoroughly refuted. You are
responsible for looking these things up.                        -5

Appeal to moral consequences. That has no bearing on
truth value.                                                    -5


GOOD LUCK