So far no one has showed actual evidence of large scale evolution taking place. That's what Darwin hypothesized. We can see small changes in a species, but that's not enough. We can see mutations, but they do not change DNA, the code that would have to change for large scale (a la Darwinian) evolution to take place. So there is no evidence like that which is needed to support his large scale hypothesis. I think evolution is a convenient way of avoiding creation and therefore avoiding God. That's only my opinion and your mileage may vary.

Creationists will tell you over and over that you have to produce transitional forms from the fossil record for evolution to be a viable process. It's not sufficient to say that a fish became a four legged creature without something in-between appearing consistently in the fossil record. You've heard the argument before, so I won't belabor it.

With HARD evidence missing, creation and evolution sit side by side as theories. Each of us believe ours has more evidence, but neither one of us can prove the other wrong. For me to prove God exists, you want to see him. I have lots of evidence outside of seeing him, but that's not for this discussion. For you to prove evolution exists, I want to see a living thing that has transitioned from one kind to another. Other than believing it is possible, it is not provable.

I'm not militant about this and not planning on changing your mind so don't get excited. I've already agreed to disagree so don't feel like I am trying to get you mad - I don't mean to do that at all.

It's like so many things in life. You start with a mindset. You assemble the information that supports your mindset and you live by it. "Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest" was a lyric from a 60's song, and it applies. Very few of us are truly open minded. I'll admit it. Will you?

Two great theories.