[goody2shooz]

Gosh. You folks all sound so...civilized. Some posters on Free Republic really get a wild hair up their arses over the issue of evolution.

Too bad more of them haven't bothered to read up on the human genome project. They would learn something new, like Creationism is impossible.

[=Intervention=]

Funny. Reminds me of all the lines I've heard from so-called scientists over the years. "This new data disproves Creationism." "That new data disproves Creationism." Of course, understanding that "Creationism" is a perjorative word invented by atheists hostile to any hypothesis, theory, or teaching that contradictions evolution is important to note. Thus, any data that hostile forces say disproves such a straw man in their mind is wholly unconvincing. (Why do these "scientists" dismiss claims of other scientists...as Michael Behe, for instance...out-of-hand? The answer is that they are more interested in protecting their paradigm and their funding than actually investigation.) The last point is critical -- the government funds the schools. The schools teach "science." If you want to maintain your funding (as most schools are wholly dependent upon the state), you don't make waves, and you adhere to the religion of the state.

[Exnihilo]

What is "creationism" in your view, and why is it "impossible"? After all, can't God do anything? That's what I've heard anyway.

[MEGoody]

How is creationism impossible? Can you give me some sort of web site or printed source reference so I can read about this amazing bit of science?

[MissMillie]

Frankly, whether it is possible or not is not the issue. The issue is whether or not "creationism" is science. Science, by definition, deals with that which is natural and/or naturally occuring. "Creationism" is about the supernatural, and has no place in a science curriculum.