I once read a Creationist website, which tried to, quite miserably, discredit a scientific point, made by a scientist who supported evolution...they did this by saying that since this scientist was a Catholic, and since we all know that Catholics believe in transubstantiation, therefore this scientist cannot really be a true Christian, therefore his scientific findings are suspect...
Good grief, how can anyone believe drivel like that?....but this was a creationist website, that tried to argue the merits of scientific conclusions, based on nothing more than ones religious beliefs...if one was a Catholic(wink, wind, nod, nod), then they cannot be a Christian, and therefore they cannot be truthful about science...they actually expected that rational people would actually buy into such nonsense...and obviously some do..
More to the point Stingray...Coyoteman had it right the first time...your version is completely incorrect...
You tried, but like these creationist websites, which do no science, but try to argue against science using nothing but their personal interpretations from the Bible(and these are nothing but personal interpretations, as no one here actually does speak for God), your attempt to change Coyotemans statement, was really quite poor...
Illustrations of so-called evolutionary "science" cited in my reply a few posts up.
"your attempt to change Coyotemans statement, was really quite poor..."
Actually, had I simply tried to change the original post, I wouldn't have gone to the trouble of quoting it. The point was to illustrate how his statement - when viewed from another perspective - cuts both ways.
Unfortunately, your knee-jerk reaction (as typified by many evols I've dealt with over the years) indicates an utter lack to understand subtlety and nuance.