[Lexinom]

The study of evolution and the ToE does not create 'non-believers', it is just the examination of observed phenomena, but the interpretation that accompanies the very existence of evolution leads some to believe it creates non-believers.

It's the causal priority that's under challenge. Is it really evidence -> conclusion? Or is it conclusion -> evidence? I submit it is the overarching theory which provides the epistomological slant on the evidence - both in its interpretation and its selection.

I don't have time to get into this any more this evening because of other obligations. Feel free to rebut, I'll respond as able.

[b_sharp]

"It's the causal priority that's under challenge. Is it really evidence -> conclusion? Or is it conclusion -> evidence? I submit it is the overarching theory which provides the epistomological slant on the evidence - both in its interpretation and its selection.

The causal priority creates atheists? Sorry, I don't follow.

However if you are asserting that 'evolutionists' are more interested in making the evidence fit the theory than testing and verifying the theory you are missing one of the points of my post - more fields than just the biological sciences contribute to the ToE,; in fact many predate Darwin and the formalization of common descent and natural selection.

Geologists that predate Darwin were aware that the Earth was magnitudes older than suggested by the Bible. 'Evolutionists' do not seek to increase dates in an attempt to justify large variations, the dates were established before evolution by non-biologists. The evidence of geology (stratification), geophysics (radiometric dating), astronomy (distance to stars + light speed) all give independent evidence for an old universe and earth.

Taxonomy in one form or another also predates Darwin, in fact it predates Linnaeus. Common descent was suspected and formalized by Linnaeus and has been verified by DNA.

The fossils found by paleontologists are not dated as old because of some nefarious desire but because the strata determines their date. The fossils are not placed in the sequences they are because there is a desire to find common descent, but are placed using the same 'common sense' methods employed by Linnaeus (bolstered by modern statistical analysis coupled with computers). For a fossil to be considered within a lineage it must share morphological features with others in the same lineage and be from a chronologically appropriate stratum that if fossiliferous, contains evidence of a predicted ecology.

If there was just one field of study contributing to the ToE it may be possible for the evidence to be forced into compliance but with as many different fields of study contributing as there are that conspiracy just doesn't wash.