[Tribune7]

It's a religious -- not science-based -- view that all life naturally evolved from a single source which explains the anger when this view is challenged.

[T'wit]

It's a religious -- not science-based -- view ... which explains the anger when this view is challenged.

Of course. The anger, or any reference to transcendant values, is irrational in Darwinist theory. It can't be fitted into either science or naturalist philosophy. But it is oh, so human.

[staytrue]

It's a religious -- not science-based -- view that all life naturally evolved

You are full of crap. The fossil record, though incomplete, is evidence that evolution is true.

Further, the fossil record indicates creationism/young earth, it almost certainly false.

THE FOSSIL RECORD IS A FACT, IT IS CREATIONISM THAT IS A RELIGION AND NOT SCIENCE.

[goldstategop]

Evolution presumes that life arose through a random set of processes. It begs the question in that if Man is no different from the rest of Creation how he arrived here, why should he be regarded as unique? If he is only a more highly evolved ape, even his presence on the planet is only of a transient nature.

(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )