nobody's talking about eliminating evolution. people are talking about presenting facts that do not support it or problems that scientists have with it. the evolutionists act like these scientists don't exist and that these facts don't exist and, when confronted with the fact that they do exist, their response is to silence them. doesn't sound like science to me. i would think evolutionists would welcome the debate.
When there are scientifically confirmed data that counter evolution some sicentist is going to get a Nobel prize and be very, very, happy.
Pseudo-challenges by Biblical literalists are not relevant.
Which facts are ther that 'do not support it'? There are areas where knowledge is incomplete and physical evidence is in short supply, but as far as I've been able to find, no evidence against the ToE.
"the evolutionists act like these scientists don't exist and that these facts don't exist and, when confronted with the fact that they do exist, their response is to silence them. doesn't sound like science to me. i would think evolutionists would welcome the debate.
Scientists may or may not welcome debate, depending on how tired they are from disabusing the notions of the uniformed, but the definitely do what they can to make a name for themselves by trying to bust current thought. If any of this 'evidence' against evolution had any validity, it would be taken up by a number of mainstream scientists in an attempt to enhance the recognition of their own contribution to science.