re: stickleback. Again we see no new information. Merely the “switching off” of a gene.

re: Differently chromosomed organisms. You are right. I’ve learned of many more since I first started this post. But none of they add to the genetic information already present. Wild horses and domestic horses are still (you guessed it) horses.

re: chromosome 2. Here are a couple good detailed problems with the theories put forth.
http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4785/
http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4653/

Your points about Hitler and Stalin are valid. And back up scripture that states none of us are good enough. (Romans 3:11-13)

Re: “No part of evolutionary theory argues for its application to human society..” True, but that doesn’t stop it from happening.

I’ll check out the site. I’m glad I come across kind enough. I do try. More correctly, I fight hard against being a jerk. And believe me it’s a real temptation many days.

Again, thanks for stopping by. You are welcome anytime. My sole purpose in having this discussion has little to do with who you vote for, but rather, where you will spend eternity. And while you may see my entire faith as derived from “Babylonian legend” it’s worth checking out this link. After all, what IF it is true?

Bad phrasing on my part. They admit the fusion of chromosome 2, not common descent. If I ever found a Creationist who admitted common descent, I would be very, very confused.

Differently chromosomed organisms CAN mate with each other sucessfully and produce fertile offspring… wild and domesticated horses, which differ by a homologous pair, are a good example.

It’s very likely that our ancestor in the past had 24 chromosome pairs; there’s very strong evidence for the fusion of chromosome 2, even if you choose not to accept common descent; and the more genetically enlightened Creationists do admit it. In the scientific mainstream, the similarity of chromosome 2 to a joining of two ape chromosomes, right down to the genes coded for, is yet another piece of strong evidence for our cousinhood.

I want to point out that it is not the fault of the system of thought, as to how it is abused. Christianity was used as a basis for the crusades, the inquisition, was often called upon to justify slavery… etc. Most people are not going to fault the bible for this, but rather the fact that some people will use whatever they can to justify gaining power over others. Hitler abused the Christian god and social Darwinism (which was not developed by Darwin, mind) in equal parts to gain control… but even if Darwin hadn’t made his mark, it’s very likely Adolf would gone ahead with his victimization anyway. Xenophobia, nationalism, and genocide existed long before Chuck published. As for the damages various communist regimes have done, while they did in general reject religion, Stalin threw in with Lysenkoist evolution as opposed to Darwinism and persecuted biologists heartily, both doing extreme damage to the Soviet agricultural industry.

No part of evolutionary theory argues for its application to human society, just that it is constantly occurring process in nature and that it has been since the development of life. In fact, to someone such as myself who chooses not to depend on a derivative from babylonian legend to establish my difference from the animals, I think it’s our rejection of these laws of nature and the establishment of our own law which separates us most significantly from our ancestors.

From what I’ve read seem more amiable and open, or at least more coherent, than many of the creationists I’ve talked with over the years, so I hope you’ll take a look at
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html
It has a list of common and uncommon claims against Evolution and the arguments against these claims. I doubt it’ll change your mind, but hopefully it will at least allow you to separate evolutionary theory from other negative concepts ideologues like to associate with it, and if nothing else refine your arguments against it.

Incidentally, it’s Christians (by far) who are building hospitals and sending missionaries to hurting countries and peoples.

And Yes, Evolutionary theory and social Darwinism are two COMPLETELY different things. But my experience has been that they lead to each other and typically someone who believes in one, believes in the other. Thanks for letting me clarify.

Furthermore, evolutionary theory and social Darwinism are two COMPLETELY different things. Please understand this dichotomy before you preach any more bigoted nescience.

However, the point with respect to Ron Paul should be that if you can’t understand why evolution is science, then you shouldn’t be head of state in a moden, industrialized country. It’s an unavoidable defect of democracy that everyone is allowed to vote, but I still plan to be vigilant about who gets elected, to the small degree I have influence.