[blowfish]

I rather fear the day when students are asked to sign a statement of faith accepting nothing but pure naturalism as the all important ground rule of theorizing in science before they can be accepted into any science course.

Now who's being hysterical?

Look, it's really simple. We're talking about *science* classes. Not philosophy. Not comparitive theology. Science.
Science operates on this thing called Physical Evidence. It's really central to the way science works.
Evolution has lots of physical evidence. Creationism/ID has none.
The fact that this physical evidence is theologically disgreeable to some people makes it no less real.

[JSDude1]

BULL:

The reality is that moderns that live now were not alive when the "creation" nor the evolution of species happened so both are somewhat a leap of faith and cannot be proven: That is why neither CAN be proven difinitively by mankind and will always be a "theory"

There is much evidence for the Supernatural creation of the earth that God caused (recorded in the Gensis account probably by Moses), and much to refute evolution, and a litte to prove evolution-not enough to claim that it was the cause of mankind..,

but if we just look at the facts.. macroevolution may be seen as nothing more than a hoax, and neither Creation/nor Evolution can be difinitively "proven"!

[doc30]

Science operates on this thing called Physical Evidence. It's really central to the way science works.

Be careful, you might get some Creationist/IDers coming out of the woodwork claiming that science must take into account supernatural explanations otherwise science is flawed. How else can science and Biblical literallist Christianity be reconciled?