There's no faster way for a newspaper, or a syndicated columnist, to loose the respect of huge numbers of people than to take on the creation vs. evolution argument. Cal Thomas wrote up the subject in "Making Monkeys out of Critics", and the Washington Times published it on Wednesday.
So which creation story should be used to "balance" Evolution? I'm not an expert on creation stories, but I think there's one about the earth being carried on the back of a huge tortoise. And another one with people popping out of Gods belly button. I think maybe some of the American Indian stories might be particularly poetic, but I don't remember any of them right now.
My point is that there is no serious scientific disagreement about the basic principles of Evolution. There ARE some creation hustlers out there, making a buck with pseudo-scientific arguments against Evolution. They remind me of the environmental hustlers that spin new scientific sounding theories how big business is destroying the planet. Both kinds of scientific hustlers are in the business to create emotional pleas to segments of the population in order to get funding for their "research". Both are frauds.
Who is Cal Thomas to say that an omnipotent God didn't create the universe, knowing in advance that it would eventually produce humans through the process that we call Evolution? It doesn't make it any less a miracle if He created life instantly by some mysterious snap of his fingers, or patiently through eons of time using the natural laws He created.
Science, through "scientific creationism" will not prove the existence of God. And science will likewise never be able to prove that God doesn't exist. You have to believe in Him by faith alone. There is no "proof" in either direction.
(narby)
Maybe he bases his remarks upon what is written by the omnipotent God of the Bible where it says:
"Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness;" (Genesis 1:26)
Virtually every Christian (not to mention many of other faiths) would adamently disagree with the contention by evolutionists who masquerade as "believers" that God's "likeness" and "image" resemble anything close to apes