Creationists and non-creationsits alike: What are your thoughts on this analogy to science?

It's pretty good. But instead of a guess that they are jelly beans, it's more like once we have the jelly beans pices in place, we don't know yet if they are in a candy dish or an Easter basket, we need more pieces, but we can see the jelly beans, we can study and know about the jelly beans and we can guess that because jelly beans will spread out if piled up, they are in something because they are piled up in this part of the puzzle.

A theory is not a guess, a theory is deductive and inductive reasoning based on known fact and basic laws.

It's a good analogy. Laypersons (creationists and otherwise) do tend to equate "theory" with "guess". There are a few considerations:

1.) Science is self-correcting, Dogma is not.

2.) The presuppositions in play will force together pieces of the puzzle that don't actually fit, and I'm not talking about square peg, round hole, I'm talking an eliptical peg (with an orbital eccentricity of 0.15), round hole.

There are too many annual layers on the Greenland and Antarctic ice shields. Terrestrial animals are chanced on previous great bodies of water. The distribution of species would not follow a development radiating out from the midsection East. between the slowest land animals, the sloth which strikes a million.2 miles in line with hour, is chanced on basically in South u . s . a .. The varieties of terrestrial animals, interior the specified parts, exceed the quantity of the ark. Geologic formations ought to no longer be formed from as we talk deposited sediments. there's a extra suited proportion of lighter bring about denser uranium in deeper rocks. Above the layers that comprise dinosaurs is a layer wealthy in iridium, between the densest factors.

A very good analogy, indeed. But to make it more convincing, you can also add that each time a puzzle is solved, when all the pieces comes together correctly, just like a jig-saw puzzle, we will have something real at hand.

Sounds good to me. They'll still try to come back with something like "who designed the puzzle", because most creationists I've seen are pretty bullheaded when it comes to their beliefs in creationism.

> "just theories"

Please see "scientific theory"... it does not mean "guess"

> scientists keep changing their minds

No, they just admit when they're wrong and refine their hypotheses rather than sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting "NA NA NA NA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

Anyway, that's how I argue it. But your analogy is sound with the puzzle.

People can make an answer but there is no a reason. (This is your so-called free will.)

God can make a reason but there is no an answer. (This is your so-called destiny & chance.)

Hope it helps.

"Truth is not a knowledge."

Truth follows with a reason. Knowledge follows with an evidence.

BUT THE BABBLE SAYS THE PUZZLE IS A BASEBALL CAP, SO THE GODLESS THEORIES ARE LIES!!