[xzins]

To me, the issue isn't about the numbers of creation stories that are rejected as about the basic premise that is rejected:

A supernatural intervention by God versus no such thing possible.

(BTW, there are some myths that are ignorant: I do not include them. Isn't there one about the earth on the back of a turtle on the back of a turtle, etc., etc.?) (When you end a question with etc., do you replace the period in etc. with the ? mark, or do you add the ? mark after the .?)

[WildHorseCrash]

(When you end a question with etc., do you replace the period in etc. with the ? mark, or do you add the ? mark after the .?)

I believe the correct form is "etc.?" The "." indicates the abbreviation of the phrase et cetera, and so does not mark the end of the sentence. The "?" functions as the sentence-ending punctuation.

[Thatcherite]

(BTW, there are some myths that are ignorant: I do not include them. Isn't there one about the earth on the back of a turtle on the back of a turtle, etc., etc.?)

Why, exactly, do you find this myth any more ignorant than one involving a magic fruit, a talking snake, an angel with a flaming sword, a global flood with the entire world ecology saved on a wooden boat, and a tower that threatened God's position of eminence?

[js1138]

A supernatural intervention by God versus no such thing possible.

Oddly enougn, the current crop of ID advocates are saying that the universe is fine tuned so that life is inevitable. This is is a religious belief, but it is at least consistent with observed facts.