Ah... calling for the OTHERS side's explanation of THEIR stuff, without giving the explanation of your OWN stuff!
I see...
"So let's have it. What's the other scientific interpretation of the wealth of evidence that supports evolution?"
Ah... calling for the OTHERS side's explanation of THEIR stuff, without giving the explanation of your OWN stuff!
I see...
Nonsense.
Science has put its cards on the table.
The scientific community's interpretation of the evidence is well known. They have determined that the evidence supports evolution. It was, after all, a study of physical data that led Darwin to formulate to the Theory of Evolution in the first place.
Incidentally, the proponents of ID have also agreed that the physical evidence supports evolution. They do not dispute any of the actual facts of evolution, after all.
In contrast, you claim that there is some sort of bias in the interpretation of the evidence. When pressed for an alternate interpretation, however, you have failed to provide one.
So tell us. If there is an alternate interpretation that addresses the evidence, where is it? Why do Creationists hide it?