[Coyoteman]

The words that are blue in the parenthesis are based upon your subjective opinion unless you or someone else have actually observed these changes taking place over time.

You have a confused notion of science. You don't have to have an observer on-site to observe everything.

It sounds like you are getting more information from creationist websites than science texts and journals.

(And I actually have studied many of the casts of pertinent fossil specimens; six years of grad school, half spent in evolution, fossil man, osteology and related subjects. I do have some background for my opinions.)

[Sopater]

You have a confused notion of science

Perhaps you're right. I come from the old school of Physical Science rather than that new fangled phylisophical ideology that you kids call science today. ;-)

It sounds like you are getting more information from creationist websites than science texts and journals.

I can understand why you would say that, since the foundation of these science texts and journals primarily present their case without discussing the problems with the theories.

In your six years of grad school, haven't you ever felt the frustration of wanting to see the proof that what they were telling you was true, but it just wasn't there?

Aren't you the least bit amazed at the unimaginable series of miracles that would have had to take place for the theory of evolution to be true?

Hasn't it ever crossed your mind that everytime science finally aspires to the next level of understanding that we had struggled and faught for, sometimes for years on end, that rather than finding the answers to the origins of life that we had hoped for, we only find higher and higher levels of complexity and more questions that need to be answered?

I'm not a PhD, not even an MS, but I have always been fascinated with science. I grew up as an agnostic and attended college and studied electrical and biomedical engineering. I was completeley unaware that there was even a debate regarding evolution and creation, I was sure that science's evolutionary explanation of eventual occupation of this planet was the truth. However, I met with one continuous frustration after another when I saw the flimsy, house of cards called evidence for the origins of life and evolutionary biology. The questions that I asked in class were never answered and the answers that were given were without any real merit. I am only interested in the truth, and I know for a fact that all of the evidence supports the truth. Right now, I am certain, that not all of the evidence supports the theory of evolution. That's the bottom line.

I encourage you to continue seeking the truth, just as I intend to. However, I prefer to seek the truth through observable, testable science, and not through blind faith and indoctrination that comes from the propaganda presented by the scientific community. So many scientists are so bent on acting like they have all the answers, that they can't stand the thought that someone would present a question, or even some hard evidence, that might cause their precious theory to fall like a house of cards in a hurricane. Anyway, that's my position, and if you, as someone with some scientific background, think that people who ask simple questions are getting their information from creationist websites, and that that is a good enough reason to ignore those questions and continue waving the flag of the general populous, then just go ahead and continue to march lock-step with your cronies for all I care.

As for me, I prefer to look for truth, because all of the evidence supports the truth.