Evolutionary Biology as a Science

Thank you Rahvin. This is an excellent OP.The concern is that we might overload Kelly. The other is I don't want this to be a duplicate of "People Don't Know What Creation Science Is"I will promote this but I'd like you to reply immediately clarifying that we are not mentioning "Creation Science" here. That is for the other thread.ABE In fact I'd like a quick topic title change to something like
"Evolutionary Biology is a Science" leaving out the mention of creationism please.Edited by AdminNosy, : No reason given.

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

This thread is NOT about creation science!
I will hide any remarks about that.I am also going to change the topic title without waiting for Rahvin.

As noted in the reply following yours. The creation 'science' issue will be restricted to the other thread.This one will be required to support the contention that biology is a science. You might do well to follow it as you reply on the thread supporting creation 'science' as a science too.

If you look around this site you will find many with a scientific bent of mind (RAZD being prime example) who have the patience to attempt to help others understand things.They do not simply point to a book and say "Read that!". They bring the facts and logic here in their own words. They adjust what they say to try to match the level of knowledge of those they are discussing with.On the other had we frequently find those on your side of the debate who, when asked to supply facts and reasoning and explain themselves and support their assertions, running away.It is a poor argument you offer when you don't bother offering any at all. Is the kitchen a bit too hot?

Then this isn't the place for you.As noted many people here already have demonstrated curiosity about creation science. They have read extensively in the creation literature (much more than you have). They have also read a great deal in the scientific literature (much, much, much more than you have).You claim to have some knowledge that these people do not have. However, you are unwilling to impart it. You point to books which, we are told by those who have read them, are typical of the genre and not of the quality you think they are.The only way to settle who is right about your sources is to bring the arguments here and discuss them. If you are unwilling to to that then you have wasted your time here and will simply reinforce what we have already learned about creationists.I would claim that many here have not only long ago "caught-up" to you but have long passed you in your knowledge of the subject at hand. If you wish to prove that wrong you will have to expend some effort. Of all the wrong assertions you have made this is the farthest from the truth. Boy! Is it a long way! . Those people that you are calling closed-minded love to be challenged, really really love it. However, you haven't even begun to do so and it appears you won't put the effort into doing so.