2/3rds of Americans want creationism taught.

But clearly you understand that Creationism is not science.Their hypothesis is that God created everything as is, and anything which contradicts that was also created by God to throw us off the track.Neither you nor I were alive during the time of the Egyptians. We have no first hand knowledge that they existed.If I were to suggest that "ancient Egypt" is nothing more than a clever hoax by late period Romans, I could point to all sorts of "evidence". For example, most of the Pharoh's tombs contain no mummies, no wealth. Clearly, the Roman's either ran out of time or budget while creating their elaborate hoax.The problem is, I wouldn't be offering evidence FOR the Roman's pulling this prank, only attacking evidence against it.Is there any evidence (other than what's written in the Bible) FOR Creationism? If so, what is it, who's presenting it and is it up for peer review?How does the evidence for Creationism stack up against the evidence against Creationism?Let's assume you are correct in your belief, paradigmatic shift will accomidate you. Anomolies will build up and science will take notice. Science has ALWAYS taken notice. Sometimes faster, sometimes slower. The same can not be said for religion.If you believe that those anomolies are already starting to pile up, fantastic. Keep them coming.But, one or two highly suspect studies, does not theory make.If you are advocating a complete review of all materials, all the evidence for and against each theory, you need to understand that it would take something like 6-10 years of nothing but biology class to go through the Pro-Evolution material.Until the creationists have even half as much, they shouldn't be asking for equal timeThis message has been edited by Nuggin, 09-01-2005 02:23 AM

Well, here's the problem. Just like we don't agree on the definition of "truth" we also disagree on "deniable". From the YEC stand point, anything that doesn't appear directly in the Bible is "deniable". All you have to do is say, "I deny that".So, for example, gravity is not true, nor asprin, nor airplanes. All of these are easily "deniable".The question needs to be, is the person who's making such a claim basing it on rational reasoning, or strictly on belief. There are multiple type of DNA tests. What he's refering to is mitochondrial DNA. Unlike normal DNA which mixes during sexual reproduction (ie I have my Mom's eyes and my Dad's hair), mitochondrial DNA passes directly from your mother to you - essentially as a clone.Because of the way it transfers, it's rate of change is very slow. So, by compairing the differences in mDNA between various groups we can figure out when various groups slit off. (for example - if the Aboriginies have something in common with the Polyneasians, but no other group has that same mutation, then we can deduce that the Aboriginies and the Polyneasians are more closely related to each other than to other groups.)Similiarly, we can look at the full range of mDNA mutations, estimate the time it would take for those mutations to have occured and work our way backwards to a single source.That's how we come to "Mitochondrial Eve", the single progenitor of the rest of humanity.Was "M Eve" a homo sapiens? No. But her offspring were the ones to survive, spread out and evolve.**Important**
mDNA is how we locate mankinds common ancestor, not all creatures common ancestor. Two different methodologies.As for locating a common ancestor of all mammals, or all animals, or all life - we look at the morphology of the fossil record.We look at a broad group, "Kingdom Animalia, Phylum Chordata" - which includes all animals with spinal chords - lizards, snakes, mice, bats, kangaroos, whales, people. What's the oldest fossil that has a spinal cord? What's the simpliest fossil that has a spinal cord? Where do we find just one animal with a spinal cord and no others?If you look at a group of fossils and there are twenty different creatures with spinal cords, obviously you need to go back further. If you look at a lay and there's a lot of shellfish and nothing with a spinal cord, you've gone too far.

Depends on if you believe to missing branches theory or not, but if we get into that, the creationists will say - "Look they don't even agree with themselves".Note to Creationists - If person A wants to paint the house blue and person B wants to paint the house red, they both still want to paint the house.

Randman,Your critisisms and your solutions don't match.You're saying - "There are these problems with ToE. It's a psuedo-science. It's unproven." Etc.But you're suggesting as a fix that we bring in something that's even less scientific, that's even less proven.Even if your critisisms are 100 percent correct (which is what we are debating), your solutions don't solve the very problem you bring up.This message has been edited by Nuggin, 09-01-2005 01:46 PM

I googled "Gerland Van Dyke" and couldn't find a thing.But let's play the balance game shall we --Gerland Van Dyke (assuming he exists) has X amount of influence on Biological science. His anti-evolution position should therefore be considered as a factor of X.On the otherhand, the POPE has Y amount of influence on Religion. He's Pro-Evolution position should therefore be considered as a factor of Y.You're suggesting that X is greater than Y.Funny, I google the pope and find lots and lots of sites.

The VAST majority of the South would rather that history books teach that the South won the Civil war. Doesn't mean it should happen

Kettle, it's me Pot, you're black.Kinda stinks when the other side won't accept what you are saying, doesn't it Randman?This is exactly what we've been dealing with from you.We present evidence. You simply state that you don't accept it.Guess what, you don't get to complain about people treating you the same way you treat them.

If we start teaching ID, then I want my IP theory taught in school as well.Here it is in short: IP Intelligent Pusher
We are kept from flying off into space not by some invisible force "gravity" for which there is no proof, but instead by the downward pressure exherted on us by the Intelligent Pusher.Why do birds, bugs, bats and balloons fly? Don't have an answer for that, but we suspect it has something to do with the letter b.