QUOTE(Justreal @ Aug 17 2005, 10:23 PM)
Just to keep the argument simple, I'm not talking about amino acids and how they form simple DNA strands out of complex chemicals or "swamp soup," as you call it. The evolution of say, a simple reproducing organism into a thinking creature, takes a long, long time by human standards, and thus, it is difficult to show quick little examples in this context.
Again, I want to just talk about creation and evolution from this point on. What examples of creation will we see tomorrow? I doubt any new people or creatures will just appear out of this air. What is the future of Creationism? How do we learn about how it works in our everyday lives? How do we teach our children to study Creationism so that they can apply it?
Many medical advances have come about through the study of genes, DNA, and micro-biology in general. All of these fields have a direct working relationship with the theory of evolution, just like the fields of physics and astronomy have a direct working relationship with the theory of gravity. What advances in medicine will come from children who are taught Creationism in lieu of evolution?
Even if you believe Creationism is how we came to be, there are no examples of it at work today. Simple fruit fly experiments show evolution working in such a clear fashion that grade school children can understand the process. Creationists should get together some experiments that show the effects of Creationism. Let me know how that goes, as I'll be first in line.
When science quits lying about what they find, I might believe what they are saying.
http://www.yecheadquarters.org/catalog2.0.html5.2.htmlPerfect example of this is the Stanley Miller experiment. Miller cheated to get his results. And just like pelt down man, science still uses it even after this is known.
Excuse #1: It shows that it can be done.
Excuse #2: It shows that what can happen will happen.
Two lame excuses for a lie, that they will not even own up to. Is what Miller did (the cheating part to get his results) written up in any science book? Nope. Is it written in any school text book? Nope. Why? People would figure out that it was a lie, so science with holds the truth of what really happened. Holding details of this experiment means your hiding something.
Is this a repeat of the Peltdown Man?Example: Pelt down man was still being taught as truth in our school text books 150 years after it was found to be fraud. Now, I want you to explain to me what makes it ok to lie on purpose to children?
Is this like the Haeckel's lie?Here again, another lie that was allowed in our text books, and taught to our kids over a 100 years after being found a fraud, a lie.
And you have a problem with creationists doing what? And what makes you think that the information your recieving is not a lie?