Replies

You have to consider: which side consistently takes quotes out of context and misrepresents the evidence? Which side uses half-truths and outright lies to convince the uninformed of the rightness of their claims? The fact that creationists must rely on such dishonest tactics speaks of the weakness of their claims.

<< The fact that creationists must rely on such dishonest tactics speaks of the weakness of their claims. >>

You mean like the fact that you show us artist renditions of extinct creatures and CLAIM they are transitions? Or the fact that you have never seen the process you profess to believe?

Or maybe the fact that even evolutionists recognize how ridiculous abiogenesis is (formerly called spontaneous generation), and do cartwheels to attempt to divorce the ORIGIN from their theories on (ahem!) origins?

Or maybe the fact that you use changes resulting from the rearranging or loss of genetic information as proof that evolutionary changes requiring new information could happen?

Of course we know how honest Piltdown man was for 40 years, and how honest Haeckel's embryo drawings were for 140 years, and how honest gluing peppered moths to trees was, and how honest archaeoraptor was. One wonders how many others we don't know about?