If your first premise there could ever be proven in any way ever, then the rest of your question would be worth answering. Since it never can, it's sort of invalid.

If elephants are bananas, and bananas are delicious, then how many pancakes does it take to fill up a doghouse?

Try again.

Look at the poll in PaRD.

Yes the embryo drawings were fabricated over a hundred years ago and the truth was revealed fairly quickly. Luckily, embryo comparisons aren't used as proof for evolution. Nice red herring.


Wrong. Creationists are constantly trying to say evolution is as much of a religion as creationism and that just isn't true. Evolution relies on supporting evidence, and it has nothing to do with being blinded by findings contrary. There exist no valid contrary findings. I think most scientists would happily accept a complete invalidation of evolution, because thats how science works. Hypothesis are created from available evidence, and reworked or thrown out entirely when new evidence arises.

Oh shit, 7 out of 13 retards on an internet message board think that Religion was man made, never mind, I didn't realize you had such overwhelming evidence.

Man, you are so fucking stupid.

Its a start, at least. Can you be more pessimistic?

I think this has devolved into a semantics argument.

Religion is always man-made. Call it divine inspiration, but it was created by humans.

God may or may not be man-made depending on his existence or not, so we'll default to not man-made.

Science cannot disprove God. Nor can it disprove some forms of religion.

LOLOLOL

Yes, nothing could be more of a start than a poll in PaRD. lolololololol

olololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololol

Look where you are arguing. Irony?

That's part of the proof presented in biology classes at least up to ten years ago. The majority of the professors at the time chastised students for not believing in the "picture". I'm not sure if I even like herring.

Creation and evolution science both seem about one step removed from a cult to me. You don't have to try to prove either is wrong to me.

That's because you're a moron.