Replies

Trying to figure out what it is about Biblical Creation that threatens to many of my Freep peeps.

Not a thing. What is it about the Big Bang that threatens many of them, since a number of them make frantic posts attempting to "disprove" it?

Can it be that it points decisively towards the existence of God Almighty?

Probably not, since a lot of the folks you're talking about are Christians -- and so are the *majority* of Americans who accept the validity of evolution, since I see that's your next topic:

I find it terribly sad that I haven't time to debate and debunk everyone that thinks they can prove evolution is factual.

Evolution is factual. Feel free to try to "debate and debunk" me.

It's still just a silly little theory.

No, it's a very well-established theory in the scientific meaning of the word, supported by mountains of evidence, has made innumerable predictions which have been confirmed by subsequent testing, and has survived countless potential falsification tests. Nothing "little" or "silly" about that. But your attempt at hand-waving it away with snide labels is rather "silly" and "little".

The genetic code doesn't back it up,

ROFL! Okay, this should be fun -- support your claim, with specifics.

the complexity of life doesn't back it up

Actually it does, quite well -- the specific nature of the complexities of life (including the vast complexities of specific DNA sequences, biogeography, nested phylogenic trees, etc. etc.) "backs up" evolution in incredible detail.

(guess what? FreeRepublic just happened when a bomb went off inside Jim Robinson's garage),

"Guess what"? Your attempted analogy to evolution shows that you really have absolutely no clue about how it works. A "bomb going off in a garage" bears as little resemblance to the processes of evolutionary biology as "I spilled my Coke" has to the Mt. Saint Helen's eruption.

and the fossil record is NOT THERE.

Oh really? A wise man once said, "never argue with a fool, bet him money". Would you like to lay a hundred bucks on a specific test of your claim, such as "the reptile to mammal transitional fossil record is NOT THERE"? Please respond at your earliest convenience.

(Even Stephen Jay Gould admitted the fossil record was a big problem for them)

Actually, "even Stephen Jay Gould" got annoyed at how badly creationists lied about his actual position (emphasis mine):

The third argument is more direct: transitions are often found in the fossil record. Preserved transitions are not common—and should not be, according to our understanding of evolution (see next section) but they are not entirely wanting, as creationists often claim.
[...]
Faced with these facts of evolution and the philosophical bankruptcy of their own position, creationists rely upon distortion and innuendo to buttress their rhetorical claim. If I sound sharp or bitter, indeed I am—for I have become a major target of these practices.
[...]
A trend, we argued, is more like climbing a flight of stairs (punctuated and stasis) than rolling up an inclined plane.
Since we proposed punctuated equilibria to explain trends, it is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationists—whether through design or stupidity, I do not know—as admitting that the fossil record includes no transitional forms. Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level, but they are abundant between larger groups. Yet a pamphlet entitled "Harvard Scientists Agree Evolution Is a Hoax" states: "The facts of punctuated equilibrium which Gould and Eldredge…are forcing Darwinists to swallow fit the picture that Bryan insisted on, and which God has revealed to us in the Bible."
-- Stephen Jay Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory"

So stop bearing false witness about Mr. Gould's position, okay?

I'm amused to find the long-defrauded information such as "Lucy" (Australopithicus aferenses)

And I'm amused to find you repeating the longstanding creationist lie that there is anything fraudulent about "Lucy" or all the other Australopithecus afarensis [spelled right] fossil specimens... Perhaps you could state specifically what your allegations are, and on what you base them?

and embryonic recapitulation still appearing in my biology book.

Gee, really? Which textbook, exactly? Be specific, and quote what it says about embryonic recapitulation. Since it's in "your textbook", I'm sure you won't have any trouble citing it.

I'm looking forward to the discussion about evolution.

So am I, son.

Read up on the subject.

Oh, I have...

Find out if an Answers in Genesis conference is in your area (usually free) and attend. Listen to them speak, and sure, hit them up with your hardest questions afterwards.

Why would I want to attend a lecture by a group which is such a constant fountain of misinformation?

But stop acting so positively confident that you know evolution is true.

It is true, because that's what the mountains of evidence indicates happened.

Not even scientsits "know" evolution is true.

Sure we do, even if you don't. Consider the following position statement:

Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to "intelligent design," to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation's public schools.

This statement has to date been signed by 542 scientists -- all named "Steve". It's the National Center for Science Education's playful rebuttal to the various "lists of people who question evolution" waved around by various creationists. The funny part is that there are more *actual* scientists (*most* of them biologists) JUST NAMED STEVE who have signed the above statement than there are on the creationists' lists of people from any profession, of *any* name, who question evolution. See the NCSE's Project Steve: FAQs.