[AntiGuv]

That's circular reasoning at its worst. You managed to go in a complete circle inside of one sentence.

I also managed to insert two others: the meteorological model and the geological model. I wanted to see who may or may not pick up on this. ;-)

Yes, and it is possible that the sun could rise in the west tomorrow. However, you would be foolish to accept such speculation as fact.

However, if the sun did indeed rise in the west tomorrow, then I would have to modify my understanding of the universe post haste. The difference between myself and a creation scientist is that I'm capable of such conceptual modifications as required to conform with observable phenomena.

[montanus]

I also managed to insert two others: the meteorological model and the geological model. I wanted to see who may or may not pick up on this. ;-)

Fair enough.

However, if the sun did indeed rise in the west tomorrow, then I would have to modify my understanding of the universe post haste. The difference between myself and a creation scientist is that I'm capable of such conceptual modifications as required to conform with observable phenomena.

Except that the theory of evolution isn't built on observable phenomenon. Remember, your previous argument was that just because something has never been observed to have happend doesn't mean that it can't.