Why would anyone who likes science, still believe in the 'theory of evolution' ....?

Because as some prominent evolutionists have admitted, the only alternative is that there is a divine Creator and even though they know that the theory of evolution is a huge house of cards full of holes that only seems to make sense when unsupported presuppositions are imposed upon the data, they don't want to admit that there is a God.

That whole list of things you would have to not believe in that someone else posted is a classic example of how unproved presuppositions have been imposed upon the data because people come to the evidence with a predisposition to come up with a way that the evidence will support their theory. One of the major flaws in their data analysis is the presupposition that the fossil record occurred with no catastrophic event like a world wide flood. Check out the Evolution Cruncher for more info http://www.godrules.net/evolutioncruncher/Cruncher...

Evidence? Somewhere in new Jersey there is a dead blonde hooker with a handful of brown hair ripped from her killer. If I have brown hair and live in Colorado, does that mean it is conclusive evidence that I killed her? Your conclusion is an illogical stretch, to say the least.

"But evolution couldn't POSSIBLY have happened!" you whine. Since the planet was created there have been roughly 10^34 chances for evolution to get it right. That's 10 to the 34th power, or a 1 with 35 zeroes after it, just in case you can't think past one million.

That's about like you telling me I have a 1 in 10 chance to make a basketball shot from the free-throw line, and then giving me a billion chances to do it. You think it'll happen?

All your article states is that DNA holds an incredible amount of information, and then does the usual creationist turnaround by stating God's existence as fact.

Besides, since when does a Christian magazine really do a good job with science?

Your source is very biased and simply not presenting the facts in an honest manner.

Why would anyone who likes science, read only skewed religious perceptions who have something to prove? You cannot start with a statement and then try to force the facts to fit your ideology. I'm so thankful there are scientists that are not biased and are willing to look beyond their own beliefs to the proof that is quite literally in the pudding.

You are using a 10 year old article not from a scientific journal to support your argument. I have a little news for you. You have no clue and the information you have is largely obsolete. Nice try.

Good News Magazine?

Are you kidding? Could you have possibly found a more biased publication from which you could copy something?

The universe sure is cool, huh? And complicated! That's why it takes 10 years to get a PhD in science - because it's complicated. Whereas Intelligent Design seems to say 'wow, that's complicated, I can't figure it out, must have been my imaginary friend'.

Sorry, this scientist and every other one she's ever met accepted evolution and thought intelligent design was bullshit.

Stop a moment and contemplate the following:

Billions Of Years

The answer lies there.

There is no 'evidence' for intelligent design. The bible is not a science book however many nutjob preachers say otherwise.

How does this taste?

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-yea...

Love your unbiased news source.