[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by Loser:
Yes, they are human. And humans are subject to politics. And humans should spend research money, money from the government, from the people, with some responsibly.

If you will read back a few Posts, I was responding to a remark that could be paraphrased as "the creationist community is dogmatic while the evolutionist community isn't"

Originally posted by Loser:

The big difference, here, between Creationism and the Theory of Evolution is that evolution can be proven. I'm not saying it has been proven, but it is possible... given enough time...

No, it isn't. Strictly speaking, nothing about the past can be proven. At best, evidence is either "consistent with" or "inconsistent with" a particular tale of events; further, evidence can be (in)consistent with multiple tails. This is why juries are instructed to rule based on reasonable doubt rather than just doubt.

Originally posted by Loser:

I went over this in my first big post in this thread. We don't have to wait for things to change, either. We just have to look for the right footprints. How will you find footprints of God? Don't give me some spiritual wise-crack, either. Give me something we can prove.

Well, there would be a decided lack of transitional structures (e.g., you could find scales, quills, and feathers, but you wouldn't find scathers, scquiles, or quithers (stuff halfway in between) - everything would either be functional or decay from something that was functional) in both the fossil record and modern critters.

Some of the Creation-related Biblical stories would leave footprints - the Flood, for example, has a few things it would leave behind, such as Noah's Ark on Mt. Ararat (there are witnesses to it, and satelite photos of an anomily that would fit the description) and evidence of a large water cataclysm (a Biblical explanation of the fossil record, also a good explanation for the smoothness of modern coal, trans-strata petrified trees, and a few other things).