EVOLUTION'S FRAUD HAS CONTRIBUTED TO ITS PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE:

Archangel, try and appreciate the fact that there are innumerable, empirical ways that verify evolution. Yes, it is true that there have been frauds, but those people acted independently. There is not some global conspiracy to push evolution without merit.Consider your OWN source and what they are willing to do to skew facts in favor of their clearly biased position. Their entire theology is predicated on the bible being completely accurate. It hangs precariously upon a wobbly precipice that at all times is ready to fall and shatter to pieces. The authors and webmasters on that site will defend creationism on the basis that if the creation story is not true, then what else in the bible is also not true?These psuedo-scientists do not conduct legitimate science because their answer comes before experimentation. That's not how science works. If the data yielded results contrary to what the bible describes, then in their mind, and obviously yours as well, it couldn't possibly be true.People believe that evolution explains natural history because it has insurmountable evidence that supports most it.Is it not possible that the people that are telling you that it is a lie are in fact the liars and manipulators?Consider your position: People in the past have manipulated science to favor evolution therefore all of evolution is false. What kind of absurdity is that?Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

---

"Three passions, simple but overwhelmingly strong, have governed my life: the longing for love, the search for knowledge and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind." -- Bertrand Russell

I assume you have evidence for this. Oh dear... You couldn't possibly be this misinformed on how evolution works in this day and age.Follow the train of logic:Wolves and huskies are related to one another, I'm sure you would agree. Both are still around. The laws of heredity don't magically turn one in to the other. One's genome is slightly different than the other which gives the two separate characteristics, which is why everyone looks different. There are always insertions, deletions, genetic drift, recessive genes, mutated genes, etc, etc. If it were not this way everyone would be carbon copies of one another. Even identical twins for the most part are not exactly identical on the genetic level.If you have enough variations, eventually you have a new species or subspecies completely independent of where time has taken their relatives genes.A simple illustration:Let's say we have Ape 1 (male) and Ape 2 (female). They procreate and produce Ape 3. Ape 3 has 50% genetic traits from 1 and 50% genetic traits from 2. This doesn't include mutations that occurred during gestation, or recessive traits becoming dominant from 1 or 2's side of the family.Do Ape 1 and 2 magically disappear because they had Ape 3? If not, then how is it evidence of one branch of family still being around present a problem for evolution? Edited by Admin, : "day and age" had left out "day"

---

"Three passions, simple but overwhelmingly strong, have governed my life: the longing for love, the search for knowledge and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind." -- Bertrand Russell

At worst the people in opposition to your claims would be misinformed, not liars, as lying is making willful and deliberate claims that are false.At best the people in opposition to your claims are right and you are simply too pigheaded to take the time to investigate it for your self. Precisely, which is why it is a mystery that you hold on to a failed belief that employs vague and brief bible verses as a credible source, especially when they don't stand up to scrutiny.The whole creationist doctrine is suspect from the start because it uses the bible as its foundation, rather than just compiling the data and making a determination after. Creationists glean their answers before, and should anything circumvent Genesis, they throw it out as inadmissible. That's NOT science, Arch. That's manipulating science. No, there are plenty of Christians who aren't given to creationist nonsense. Creationists are the problem, not Christians. The reality is that NO ONE knows definitively what happened before planck's time, including you. It may be philosophically easier to insist that a God must have created it all, but then we then rely on a series of infinite regressions. For if God is eternal, then why couldn't our universe have been spawned by another universe with a totally different set of physics?One question simply begats another, on both sides of the argument. The chicken/egg problem does not automatically default to God, as that just introduces new variables.All we know is that the data we do know and understand points to the cosmological fact that the universe did in fact come in to existence billions of years ago. That is based on observations. The Hubble telescope has done more to refute creationist claims than almost anything else, aside from Darwin. How is that nearly ALL of science is at odds with your belief, yet somehow everyone else is wrong? Ponder that deeply.I have no aversion towards believing in God. I simply have no good reason to assume that the god described in the bible is an accurate portrait of that God.All of you claims are reliant upon the fact that some evolutionary frauds have been foisted on the general public, as if that somehow undermines the entirety of the study. That's ridiculous, especially since these people acted independently.This also denies the mountain of legitimate evidence that either totally refutes or at least seriously questions the whole of creationism. Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

---

"Three passions, simple but overwhelmingly strong, have governed my life: the longing for love, the search for knowledge and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind." -- Bertrand Russell