[proud American in Canada]

Regarding evidence, I'm probably stepping in way above my head here, but what about carbon dating? Doesn't that show that fossils, etc., are millions of years old?

[Cold Heat]

This issue was settled once and for all many years ago. My understanding of the outcome of all the court battles is that for lack of scientific or other bonified evidence, both theories would be taught and not refuted. What PBS is doing is against the law as I understand it.

[Nyralthotep]

Carbon dating ican only be done on organic material. Dating on rock samples and such is done by looking at an element that decays into another element and making an assumption based on how much of the latter element is present that it took x amount of years for the former element to decay so it's x years old. Unfortuantely they assume that the only way the latter element can be present is by decay but they don't actually know what the proportions of the elements are because again, nobody was there to test the sample after it's formation. What most people want to believe is that these scientist are objective people when many of the evolutionary scientists are avowed athiests. I'm not advocating either position, but I would prefer it to be an honest discussion with assumptions being placed on the table for all to see.

[rwfromkansas]

Carbon dating sometimes can be way way off. However, I am an old Earth creationist. This means while I do not think evolution has scientific support, I also think no serious person can claim that the earth is only a few thousand years old also.