Maiden: I agree with you. If there is a god, evolution is certainly a much more fascinating way in which he/she/it would work... why would god need to meddle in every step of human development? As the almighty, wouldn't you be genius enough to create a way for live to evolve itself? I'll say it, and I'll say it with authority... because I've yet to see anyone prove me wrong... staunch creationists don't have the slightest idea of the grand scale of evolution. They can't fathom a span of 4.6 billion years.. much less 7000. They don't understand the myriad intricacies of the science behind evolution entirely... protein folding, protein synthesis, DNA, RNA transcription, ATP (Adenosine Triphosphate) energy production, biochemistry, genetics, microbiology, etc. and how much these factors have evolved in 4.6 billion years to go from simple electrochemical compounds to the vast forms of life that exist today. The breadth of evolution escapes them, because they presuppose that the world only existed as long as judeo-christian recorded history. No matter what evidence you present, it's absolutely pointless... but one thing strikes me as odd... those sciences aren't flawed as long as they prove things Creationists don't object to... but if they prove evolution, then in those instances, the results or findings are wrong. How wonderful! Self-referential reasoning... bring that up, and they don't even know what you're talking about. Self-perpetuating delusions... refer to their doctrine in this fashion, and guess what? They'll sidestep and try to argue about some other "holes" in your theory. Then, lay on the most conclusive, most recent evidence of evolution... "master genes" that control whole subsets of genes, and they have nothing to say... they simply skip it since there's no argument they can present against it... and even if they tried, they'd be in over their heads because they haven't the slightest clue of that which they're arguing against. Point at holes in their arguments, and they'll make excuses... but they will point at one hole in an argument with 100 years of research and 50,000 other cogent points, and say the entire science of evolution is wrong. Their idea of proving god is like the blind men and the elephant... they'd rather try to prove that which they cannot see with words which they cannot prove... than to use the evidence of god that exists in nature, every day, before our very eyes. So, one wonders, why even bother? They're going to continue fighting cumulative logic and research findings with circular arguments that haven't grown past their original, narrow-minded perception of the world in the past two thousand years. Long after technology has helped restore sight to the blind, creationists will still lack the ability to see the god that's before their very eyes.