i would also like to add that due to evolution there was a outbreak of pigs with the flu that could travel throught the air. this is signifigant because usually this type of flu can only be traveled by direct contact. this is what people feared during the whole avian flu thin

and about teachers being fired about evolution because parents say that teachers are poisoning there children or whatever. this is because there is contamination in schools and there should be seperation of church and state. but if a teacher is in a private school or a catholic or other religious school they are allowed to speak there beliefs. but schools should only be allowed to speak hard facts or label everything as a theory. but it is also the schools fault because they are just firing the teacher because that parent or higher up is complaining about what the teacher is speaking and because the school wants more money so they fire the teacher and keep all the kids that had there parents complain. the only real way of solving this problem is to have a socialist school system and have each school given money on accordance to how well scores are and so forth.

Simon has a good point. TMFA has a good point. Emily has a good point. Wendy has a good point. Hannah has a good point. This is getting pointless. OK, go on with your conversation. 

First off, let's wrap up the religion stuff. Just because you're Christian, doesn't mean I am. So let's get the excuses about being Christian outta the way.

And now, look closely at a WHALE'S SKELETON. What do you see? A PELVIS. And do whales have hind legs? NO. Could whales once have had hind legs, hence the pelvis? YES.

When non-biologists talk about biological
evolution, they often confuse two different aspects of the
definition. On the one hand there is the question of
whether or not modern organisms have evolved from older
ancestral organisms or whether modern species are
continuing to change over time. On the other hand there are
questions about the mechanism of the observed changes...
how did evolution occur? Biologists consider the existence
of biological evolution to be a fact. It can be
demonstrated today, and the historical evidence for its
occurrence in the past is overwhelming. However, biologists
readily admit that they are less certain of the exact
mechanism of evolution; there are several
theories of the mechanism of evolution. Stephen J.
Gould has put this as well as anyone else:

In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect
fact"--part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill
from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power
of the creationist argument: evolution is "only" a theory
and intense debate now rages about many aspects of the
theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and scientists
can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what
confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan
echoed this argument before an evangelical group in Dallas
when he said (in what I devoutly hope was campaign
rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a scientific theory
only, and it has in recent years been challenged in the
world of science--that is, not believed in the scientific
community to be as infallible as it once was."

Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts
and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy
of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data.
Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret
facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival
theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation
replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't
suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And
humans evolved from apelike ancestors whether they did so
by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be
discovered.

Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty";
there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex
world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow
deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only
because they are not about the empirical world.
Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though
creationists often do (and then attack us falsely for a
style of argument that they themselves favor). In science
"fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it
would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I
suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the
possibility does not merit equal time in physics
classrooms.

Evolutionists have been very clear about this
distinction of fact and theory from the very beginning, if
only because we have always acknowledged how far we are
from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by
which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually
emphasized the difference between his two great and
separate accomplishments: establishing the fact of
evolution and proposing a theory--natural selection--to
explain the mechanism of evolution.

- Stephen J. Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory"; Discover, May 1981

Also:

It is time for students of the evolutionary
process, especially those who have been misquoted and used
by the creationists, to state clearly that evolution is a
fact, not theory, and that what is at issue within biology
are questions of details of the process and the relative
importance of different mechanisms of evolution. It is a
fact that the earth with liquid water, is more than 3.6
billion years old. It is a fact that cellular life has been
around for at least half of that period and that organized
multicellular life is at least 800 million years old. It is
a fact that major life forms now on earth were not at all
represented in the past. There were no birds or mammals 250
million years ago. It is a fact that major life forms of
the past are no longer living. There used to be dinosaurs
and Pithecanthropus, and there are none now. It is a fact
that all living forms come from previous living forms.
Therefore, all present forms of life arose from ancestral
forms that were different. Birds arose from nonbirds and
humans from nonhumans. No person who pretends to any
understanding of the natural world can deny these facts any
more than she or he can deny that the earth is round,
rotates on its axis, and revolves around the sun.

The controversies about evolution lie in the realm of
the relative importance of various forces in molding
evolution.

- R. C. Lewontin "Evolution/Creation Debate: A Time for
Truth" Bioscience 31, 559 (1981) reprinted in Evolution
versus Creationism, op cit.

 My post is getting long enough. 

*looks dumbstruck*

Whoa, Beatlesrockr, YOU ARE SO RIGHT ABOUT EVOLUTION!

But I just have to say, as long as there is an earth, and everything that exists exists, I am perfectly content with either evolution or creation. Or even both.

And, Wendy, there could be life on other planets, because there is this one planet (I forgot which) that is covered in ice. And under that, there may be SOMETHING.

One of the main arguments of you guys who support creationism is that creationism should be taught in schools because it's only fair to present both sides of the argument. Yeah, but what about the Native American craeaionism story? The Muslim, Jewish, and Mayan creationism story. It's only fair.

Look, I agree with whoever says creation and evolution coexist. Maybe Genisis covers the entire prehistoric time span, plus a bit more. Or maybe how God created the world was incomprehensible and could not be described in human language, so He described it in such a way that it is close to how He really created it, but also describable in human language. I know the English language came after Genisis was written, but even with so many words for so many new words and concepts, creation could not be described in any language humans could comprehend.

So here's what I think. Evolution and the Big Bang theory are definitely facts. Unless scientists have been completely mistaken, which could always be true, but is just not likely. But that doesn't exclude the possibility that God created the world and all the life on earth today. Why can't God work through genes and "big bangs" and things like that?

Also, with that thing from the science editor earlier in this thread, evolution DOES NOT describe how life formed. Therefore, evolution and creation do not contradict. Also, because the sun was not created until the fourth day, we can't say for sure how long a "day" is, because the 24-hour clock is based on the sun and earth. Also, due to time dilation, it could have been 6 days from one perspective that is moving really fast. Sure, the edge of the universe is moving super fast. Maybe those 6 days are from the perspective of the universe or God. So there is actually no evidence whatsoever that evolution contradicts creation.