In Ray's latest post, after some common building-builder-painting-painter rubbish, Ray writes,
I would say that creation is absolute 100% scientific proof that there is a Creator. A creation cannot create itself, from nothing. But that's what the atheist believes--that nothing created everything from nothing. That's a scientific impossibility, and only a fool would believe that.
This is where Ray misunderstands the atheist's position -- and I think deliberately so, because he's been around long enough that it's certainly been explained to him enough times (just like the debunking of the banana thing, which Ray continues to use, and how is that honest, Ray?):
The issue is not whether a creation implies a creator. The issue is whether the natural realm is a created artifact.
You haven't proven that it is. You've only insulted us. A person with a good argument doesn't use bad arguments, still less insults. Nor have you proven that nothing is the default, "natural" state of existence, from which "something" must have sprung. Science tells us that even a so-called "empty" vacuum is positively full of objects and events at the quantum level. Where's this nothing we're supposed to think we've come from, huh Ray?
And by the way, Ray, while you're on the subject of fools, perhaps you could tell us where in Matthew 5:17 we can find an exception for those who commit that particular crime by quoting a book. For your own sake.