[DoughtyOne]

Well there have been a number of your attempting to carry on a dialogue with me.  If I missed a pronouncement to this effect, I'm sorry.

Even the progression of man from singled celled organism is not sustainable.  We have established that you can't prove anything in science.  You do remember that right?

What it all boils down to is that you folks have observed some evolution, and voyola, that's the definitive basis for the origion of man.  Nah.  It may be.  It may not be.  It is not definitive.

[Dimensio]

What it all boils down to is that you folks have observed some evolution, and voyola, that's the definitive basis for the origion of man. Nah. It may be. It may not be. It is not definitive.

Definitive? No. Nothing in science is beyond reproach. However, to claim that it is purely "faith based" implies either that you've not studied the issue at all or you are dishonestly misrepresenting the information published in support of the theory. It's far more than speculation and conjecture.

[FreeReign]

What it all boils down to is that you folks have observed some evolution, and voyola, that's the definitive basis for the origion of man. Nah. It may be. It may not be. It is not definitive.

I'm glad you recognize that "some" evolution has been observed. The evidence is strong that the creation of different species has been an evolutionary process.

Sure there are many missing links in the fossil record. That is the nature of fossilization. Sure, one can't demonstrate a continous lineage from single cell organism to humans.

But as you admit there is a lot of evidence that different species have involved.

The above is a very simple scientific summary of evolution. It is what should be taught in science class. It is what was taught to me in college as a GeoChem major.

As I look through my old Geology, Paleontology, Stratigraphy books that I saved from college, I notice that nowhere in these books does it say that man evolved from apes.

Particularly in my "Evolution of the Earth" science book I look for any such statement of fact and I don't see it. When this books mentions Darwin, it doesn't cover Darwin's postulation about apes and man. It does mention natural selection, the fossil record and the specifics of cell mutations.

This is science. ID is not science.