@Steve Barlow:

Please point to one peer-reviewed article by an actual scientist that proves any part of your arguement. Texts written after 1850 would be preferred.

His position is not unique. The episcopal church, which has millions of members and is one of the largest in the US, believes in evolution. The church supports women clergy and gay rights, the Bishop in New Hampshire is actually gay. The church is both spirtiually and politically progressive. The idea that religion and science agreeing is some amazing thing is a pretty ignorant stance.

In general, the idea that any religion and science are opposed is ignorant. I’m a buddhist and we support science over mythology, as do most of the christians I know. Unfortunately, dedicated christians or buddhist being normal is very controversial, so the media, and apparently Discover Magazine, have decided to portray people like Sarah Palin and other nutjobs as average Chrisitans.

Go to a buddhist, episcopal, unitarian gathering. Talk to people from progressive churches. Relgion and science can co-exist, as they have for 1,000s of years. If we extremist christians and anti-religion people make this a black and white issue, nobody will be happy with the result. It would be nice to some posts on a science site that don’t vilify anybody who’s not a strict atheist.

Let me get this straight. Despite all scientific evidence, you refuse to believe that life evolved over billions of years through natural processes, but instead, based on no evidence whatsoever, choose to believe the invisible cloud-daddy created everything out of thin air in 6 days using magic. Is that about right?

“There are 100 million fossils which show that animals which lived hundreds of million years ago are exactly the same as their current counterparts. This is clear evidence “against evolution.”

Evolution does not mandate that all living things change at a constant rate. This lack of understanding is shown in the following statement as well:

“Also, natural selection does not have the capacity to change the genetic code on the DNA. ”

Natural Selection is the mechanism through which helpful mutations are propagated and harmful mutations are weeded out, not the mechanism through which they are created in the first place.

The entire rest of the basis for your argument appears to be your own failure to understand evolutionary mechanisms by your own admission. Because you do not understand it you attribute it to your own god of the gaps. Even if your presented evidence against evolution were valid it does not promote the idea of creationism in any way. It especially does not promote the idea that your own particular religion is correct in all its supernatural assumptions. Your plea to be open-minded (eyed? hearted, I guess?) is a weakly disguised display of arrogance trying to uphold a false dichotomy.

There is no need for a god or any other supernatural force to explain what are already well (if not completely) understood natural processes, or even any processes that are not yet understood.

There are 100 million fossils which show that animals which lived hundreds of million years ago are exactly the same as their current counterparts. This is clear evidence “against evolution.”

Also, natural selection does not have the capacity to change the genetic code on the DNA. The rabbits may run faster, and survive but they do not turn out to be other “more advanced” and “advantageous” creature because their DNA code is not effected. They die in the end along with their faster running legs. Lamarckism is already an outdated theory.

Therefore, creation is a fact, evolution could not have happened. Besides, no graduation can explain the irreducible complexity in for instance body organs. Think of the blood, if all blood cells had presumably evolved without the hemoglobin molecule inside, what use? If the stomach did not have the protective tissue to prevent destroying itself due to hydrocholoric acid, what use? If all organs were there but you could not breathe with your lungs and the oxygen was not transferred to each one of your cells, what use?

Please think once again before you decide. Evolution - really did not happen, cannot have happened - there is no evidence, no mechanism. But all findings and science indeed show that there is an anthropic principle behind the universe with incredibly fine tuned quarks in the atom, nuclear power in the nucleus of the atom, 3 billion lettered vast library with immense information in the DNA.

Who encoded the DNA?
Who made the quarks in the atom?
Who set the oxygen in the atmosphere just in the right ratio so that we are not burnt to death?
Who mixed water - soil and minerals to bring out thousands of vegetation and fruit with wonderful tastes and scents right from the dark earth?

God is the Creator of every detail that we see in this universe, and we will see the intelligence and wisdom behind each and every created thing if we look with an open eye (heart).

Intelligent design/creationism is not only cherry-picked science, it is faulty theology as well. Startling as it may seem, by continually protesting that “blind” chance could only lead to “accidental evolution”, all denialist forms of creationism contradict the Bible’s clear teachings that chance occurrence in the universe (randomness), is always under God’s direct control!…Oops! How long will it take proponents to realize they are pushing what they themselves would call heresy? Try this:

http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=34289

It’s called: “Intelligent Design Rules Out God’s Sovereignty Over Chance”

And while I find no fault in personal faith, America has a long tradition of attempting to force religious views upon others. I believe religion is a personal right, but not a public mandate.