Memes for creation against evolution

Memes that will help you in debate Evolutionists. They are informative, witty, and often funny. Here are just a few examples. They are free to use on the internet, and churches, sermons and other teaching formats. The memes where you see 2 of the same is where one is optimized for the internet (smaller file) and one is not. So the ones that are not paired you may want to check their quality before you display full screen before a crowd on your projection system.

I claim no copyrights to them and they fall under the fair use act.

Sorry, I just noticed the meme just above this has a misspelled word. It’s supposed to be partisan not pastisan.

[download id=”2457″]

Creation Memes you can use for debates!

Click on images to see text fully, and for the link to the articles that go with them that you can use. You can also get an idea of what kind of responses you will get from such an article and how to respond to them. If you use the articles make sure you put them in your own words. Unless you are sharing copy and pasting an exact copy is considered parroting from another source which is frowned upon on the internet. It’s one thing if you are quoting or sharing to copy directly. But another when you are not. Not that I have a problem with this but if you are debating and someone actually look up the original source. They will point out that you are using someone Else’s argument because you can’t think for yourself (an atheist tactic). So just change the wording a little (put it how you would say it). ~ Issac

National Geographic declares war on AIG!

National Geographic goes militant atheist on Answers in Genesis a Creation ministry. Their new magazine named: The War on Science, mentions the AIG museum and not in any positive terms. Check this out on a page I run on FaceBook.

Is science extremely bias?

Ever wonder why atheists always say:

1) Where is your creation evidence?
2) There is no creation evidence?
3) Get you creation evidence approved of by science?
4) Show us your peer reviews?
etc…

It’s because atheists run and control science. Which means science also has an atheist agenda. This agenda is to disprove God or at least keep the idea at bay. Above is a picture I made up that best explains this. Shows how science works today (bias) to protect the theory (evolution) that best fits the atheist agenda. And shows how science should work (non bias) if science were run with no agenda. It’s quite an eye opener. This is what atheists don’t want you to realize because this totally discredits science and all that they do. That’s because bias is not science and this clearly shows bias in it’s most extreme form exists. How extreme can this bias be?

Something from nothing?

In the big bang theory, it’s basically something from nothing. Science does not know where the matter came from, or the energy that made it expand (inflate or blow apart). In fact if you ask 10 different people, you will get at least 3 different stories about how the origins of everything happened. So what is believed is that matter and energy come from nothing. Why believe something they cannot even begin to prove empirically? It is because the alternative points to an intelligent being. But since most everyone knows about the big bang, let’s see how many answers the intelligent creation can answer that big bang does not and cannot.

1) Because God is eternal, He lives in a eternal dimension. Using matter and energy from that dimension to form this dimension answers many questions.
a) Where did the matter and energy come from? It always existed because it came from a dimension that has always existed.
b) How do laws come into being fully balanced to create order and not chaos? An intelligent being from an eternal dimension created them and balanced them.
etc…

When using deductive logic and reasoning, and you remove all that will not work. What is left is creation by an intelligent being. Science is supposed to follow the evidence where ever it leads, yet it is taboo to follow any evidence that points to the supernatural. Basically that rule makes science more about conformism, in the effect that all evidence has to conform to the naturalistic view of evolution or be rejected. Science cannot find the Creator because their own rules won’t allow it.