[metmom]

What evidence? What you call "evidence" is a book with fantastic tales in it.

As opposed to "On the Origin of Species"?

If the Bible qualifies as a book with fantastic tales in it, then EVERYTHING man wrote should be held to that criteria because there's no reason in the world to presume that any other work of man is any different.

Evos can cry *evidence* all they want, but it's not evidence that they refer to but INTERPRETATION of the evidence. The same evidence in the form of hard, physical objects can be interpreted in different ways.

Evos claim that the *evidence* supports their viewpoint. Others, using the same evidence, claim that it supports their viewpoint.

The argument isn't over the validity of the evidence, what it is and was, but the interpretation of the evidence, what it means and tells us about the past,

And scientists don't have a corner on the interpretation of evidence market. They can be, and have often been, wrong as well and there's no reason to not conclude that they will continue to be wrong in the future.

[kosta50]

Evos claim that the *evidence* supports their viewpoint. Others, using the same evidence, claim that it supports their viewpoint

Same thing with believers. They argue at nauseum what the Bible says. Same book same verses, thousands of different interpretations.