Chicken or the Egg Discussion

[DonCasablanca]

Those "brilliant" scientists you mention are only ones biased for Evolution, found in textbooks and magazines that are biased for Evolution. The evidence for a very young earth certainly won't appear in textbooks at schools, since that would go against the religion they teach.

Yes, it probably is a safe bet that Creationism hasn't attracted any "brilliant" scientists.

I think it is absolutely pathetic that you would go so far to refer to Evolution as a "religion" that "biased ... textbooks and magazines" teach, as if to snub Evolution as an equally faith-based (or "bias"-based) doctrine as that of Creationism. As if Evolution was a religion.

Yes, you have successfully identified the sickening irony of your point of view: Evolution is, by definition, a science. The Bible is, by definition, a sacred religious text.

I am deeply offended, as an Episcopalian, that you would try to read any words of the Bible and substitute them for something as banal as a middle-school biology textbook. Science has built up evidence -- excellent, unrefuted evidence, that has spawned scores of new sciences -- that Evolution explains the fossil record. The Bible hasn't explained the fossil record -- the Bible is about something that Christians should know is more important.

So if you have a crackpot explanation of the fossil record, be my guest and explain why radiocarbon dating is so wildly wrong. But Evolution is not a religion, so you have to play by the rules of Science. And read why this "not enough time for mutation" nonsense is indeed nonsense in last month's thread on this topic.