I don't really think they are looking for one.
>could stop arrogantly attacking all myths concerning evolution except
Evolutionary biologists actually ignore all myths concerning origin of life
and focus on the facts and what they seem to tell us. So far they've pretty
much ruled out Spider Woman (Hopi, I think), Tiamaat, and the
Babylonian/Jewish creation myths.
>The belief that the fossils which have been found gradually
>turned into each other is also a myth--with nothing to support it other than
>the passionate wish that this simplistic formula IS an ultimate understanding
you need to come up with something besides "I don't like it" to refute it.
Otherwise you--and other creationists--will continue to be ignored.
>Part of It may even be true, but science has no understanding of
>the mechanism by which major changes in organisms happened. Insisting that
>"random mutation and natural selection" is the answer, might even eventually
>damage the credibility of science as Neo Darwinism becomes less and less
I think you must not understand why *evidence* is important. I have a
feeling you've bought the line of argumentation that says that evolution is
*merely* a philosophy. It's not, any more than physics is.
Peace is not the absence of conflict--it is the presence of justice.
--Martin Luther King, Jr.
Please visit my website: