Replies

These people never quit, positing anyone who dare question evolution as a creationist. The fact is that 99.9% of the scientific community do not accept evolution as a scientific fact. After 150 years, not a single series of fossils have been found that demonstrate a gradual mutation of one species into a completely different species. This would require such gradual changes as one sees in the frames of a movie. No scientist, or group of scientists, or all scientists together, have put together such a gradual mutative change. Rather, changes are by great leaps, which modern evolutionists admit, and for mating purposes, such leaps would have to occur simultaneously in two animals. This is what Darwinists have to explain before their theory becomes a fact. That such leaps occur replies as much faith in their "science" as does the creationists faith in their "science." If you read Gould, even Darwin, carefully, they admit the limitations of the theory, but those limitations are not widely taught. If you want to hear them in the Darwinist's own words, read Phillip Johnson's, Darwin on Trial.

The fact is that 99.9% of the scientific community do not accept evolution as a scientific fact.

Gee, with that kind of support you'd think you'd be able to come up with one, just one, peer-reviewed article published in a reputed scientific journal supporting this contention -- after all, it can't be a conspiracy on the part of 0.1 percent of the scientific community to keep the the rest in line -- they wouldn't have the clout.

The truth of the matter is, 99.9 percent of the scientific community accepts evolution as fact; the actual mechanisms behind evolution are what is debated, but the contention that all organisms change over time and have arisen from common ancestor is not in any way questioned. As one biologist put it back in the 70s, evolution is the foundation of the modern biological sciences. You can rant and rave all you want, but until such a time as you, or one of your ilk, put forth a theory which does a better job at explaining the Earth's biosphere than does evolution, you will be pretty much urinating in the face of a gale. As to such a theory, here's a hint: claiming a supernatural cause (i.e., "God did it") is not a scientific theory.

Excuse me!! That is why it is CALLED A THEORY!!! If you do not know what the definition of a theory is then that is your own problem not mine.

The THEORY of evolution has NEVER pretended to be fact, it is a theory that fits the known scientific data that we have at hand. It puts that data together in a logical form and makes sense.

This article called it exactly right, creationists have nothing but the bible to back thier claims, and therefore will go after the THEORY of evolution because it MAY harm thier faith. Well, go after the theory all you want, because it is JUST THAT a THEORY, it happens to fit all the facts at hand, but it is still a theory and changes every day as new scientific findings help put the puzzle together.

When you can PROVE creationism, then come talk to me, but until then, I will believe in the THEORY of evolution, because it makes the most sense at this time, and when you prove INTELLIGENT design, come see me as well. In the meantime, I will look at the THEORY of evolution as the closest explanation of what happened and how we got here. But, if and when the THEORY of evolution is disproved and a new scientific theory takes it's place, I will look at the new theory, see what a MAJORITY of scientists think, and I will move to that new theory if I feel the FACTS are there to back it up. The THEORY of evolution is NOT a sacred cow, THAT IS WHY IT IS A THEORY!!!