don firth- it can hardly be blasphemous to accept what God has revealed. not that you point to anything as being divinely revealed.
you prefer to trust in the unevidenced idea of other worlds and lifeforms out there. I have always said that I cannot prove creation as per bible timeframe but I sure think that the evidence supports a more recent creation than evolutionism posits. those dino bones are doing very well if they are 65 MYO !

bill- good science, as I understand it has to do with repeatable, testable experiments.[ why is that illogical?] evolutionary theory does not fit that, unless you can demonstrate otherwise. in fact , I reckon the evidence is not in its favour because the present so often demonstrates what in Darwinian doublespeak is called "evolutionary stasis"- ie creatures/organisms represented in the fossil record look much the same as the modern examples. I appreciate you mentioning archaeology confirming bible sites. I imagine there is something in these finds that confirms this, at least to a reasonable level of confidence.
how do you propose that compares favourably with Darwinian interpretations of fossils, to say artifacts at an archaeological site?. imagine the latter can be more accurately attested as to date, culture etc.