This is a hot topic, and tempers flare. I may have been short with you, and if I have, I'm sorry. I hope we haven't gotten off on the wrong foot.
What I don't want to see is new folks like you getting roped in with some of these kooks. On this thread we have people who think western medicine is a fraud and the face on mars is real. Please, take what some of these people say with a grain of salt. Maybe a whole salt lick.
Evolutionary science is well established, and for good reason. It is a useful model, and it has applications beyond biology and medicine to such distant fields as computer science and oil exploration.
No one, and I mean no one is asking you to abandon your faith in the Lord. There are many, many people working in the sciences, including evolutionary biology, who are people of faith. Many people I know personally from biology and geosciences are church (or synagogue) going people and most have some measure of religious faith.
The people who say that evolution is the religion of socialism or Hitlerism are wrong. Those folks have an axe to grind. My purpose in these threads is to advocate in favor of science, and also the point of view that faith and science are not mutually exclusive. Frankly, there's a lot of BS in these threads, and I hate the idea of it being associated with conservative politics. I'm not the only one, either.
I am exceedingly greatful for your #466 post, and I have taken no offense from your earlier remarks. I am quite aware that I'm ignorant of many things. The further I went in my education, the more I learned that the less I knew. I have been able to adjust my "Faith" with respect to the concept of "Evolution" (not exactly they way I want to state this, but I believe you understand my meaning). I in no way meant to claim that evolution is not a viable construct, but was inquiring as to where in the fossil record exists those transitionals which would fully explain the theory.
I paid no attention to those who would equate evolution with socialism or Hitlerism. Evolution is an legitimate attempt to explain much that is as yet unexplainable in full, and I realize this. I also know there are people who make their living in the "sciences" who also have a "Faith in the Lord". One of my Professors is in that mold. He explained his position on both, which included an acknowledgement that evolution as a theory has many flaws as well as validity. It is not a complete theory, and perhaps will never be. I have no axe to grind, and an interested in learning new things. But people who put before me that which I've already been exposed to and say "see, there it is" aren't very convincing when I wasn't convinced the first time around (in the courses I took). When my Prof was unable to agree with the evols that there is evidence of one animal becoming a different animal based on the current fossil record, well, then how am I to say it is so? Reason suggests that the fossil record would have more transitionals than what has presently been found that would show more of the evolutionary changes from one to another subspecies or species. But, no-one has found those transitionals as yet. When they do, then I'll have more evidence to derive a different perspective.