[Rudder]

Those who are threatened by the concept of evolution are insecure in their religious faith.

[Michael121]

To measure the date we use carbon dating. Yet can you answer with certainty the amount of carbon at any given time? As in, were the levels constant? The answer is no. So we can get approximate dates, but relative to how close in terms of the universe?

If we can take a leaf from a tree and date it as being 10,000 years old, yet it was just removed and is still green, then how can we rely on this?

Science goes out of its way to try to disprove the existance of God. More so than to try and prove evolution. Science lacks in both. To deny a "supreme being" without proving "his" non-existance conclusively, is a fundemental error. To prove "evolution" wihtout complete proof, such as all missing "links" is also an error.

Your glass is always half empty. Pick a faucet and fill the glass first before you drink. Or suffer for your lack of thirst. As science turns on the water more and more drops come. Some hot some cold some blue some clear.

Meaning that the evidence, as more is gathered seems in direct contradiction to itself. And arguments about the extiction abound. Science cannot agree with itself on global warming as the evidence suggests it is cooler than the dark ages were. And the measurment of the temp, has been altered to include the sea temp which was never before added into the equation. So it would seem to be warming when this is factored in, yet it messes up the numbers.

Leave politics out of science and deal directly with the fact found. Leave anit-religious agendas out of science and deal with the facts found. But sadly it seems most science attacks religion and a lot of science bases itself on some politically correct finding.

Truth is truth all else are lies. When you deal with truth only, you have all you need. When you make assumptions then are later proved wrong, you lose credibility. You as in science.

The Bible if nothing else, has proven things archeologically
and including the existance of Peter. His house, and his name carved upon a stone. In the fishing village he was from. When you use the evidence found in the pages of the Bible and things start to add up, more truth upon more truth it is hard to deny the "whole" when the sum of its parts turn out to be real.

Science has yet to find life on another planet. Yet they keep trying in this. So they seem to have their own faith. But have yet to prove it to the world.

[No Dems 2004]

"Those who are threatened by the concept of evolution are insecure in their religious faith."

Threatened by evolution? Lol! I just don't believe the stupid, unproven (and unprovable) fallacious theory. And neither does Alamo-Girl, from what she tells me.

Evolution is simply incompatible with the Biblical account of creation. Oftentimes, this simple, fundamental account of how it all began is just too much for the educated man.

[Mamzelle]

re: Those who are threatened by the concept of evolution are insecure in their religious faith.

This one could keep me busy all day...

Those who are threatened by the concept of divine origin are insecure in their professional vanities...

Those who threaten believers with the appellation of "superstition" are insecure in their expectation of university grant committees...

[connectthedots]

Those who are threatened by the concept of evolution are insecure in their religious faith.

Those who are secure in their faith in the Creator of the universe are not threatened by the religion of evolution. Your implication that Christians who reject macro-evolution has no basis in fact or logic.