Do you Think Evolution Should be taught in School?

A very succinct response and I concur totally. Bravo!

Thank You!

You should also remember that 99 percent of our evolution happened before the birth of any religion and God as we know it. Because God came to us 5000 years ago... when our planet was already several million years old. God came to us after the dinosaurs.

There are over 600 credible scientists from around the world who disagree about the "evidence" of evolution. They believe there are too many holes in the theory, too many problems. There are missing links, which Darwin himself stated would be a problem if never found. There is irreducible complexity, which states that there are systems within the body that could not have evolved or they would not have been able to sustain life. These are the critical points which no one is allowed to bring up in debate. Upon bringing them up, the one posing them is ridiculed and mocked. (just watch what is said about me after this.) I think these things need to be pointed out as serious problems with the theory. Only then can we look for answers to them, instead of just sweeping them under the rug as if they don't exist. http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org

It's how one interpret what one's calls evidence. Maybe you'd see it clear if you could provide an example of what you call evidence. I then will show how there are scientists just as qualified will look at your so called evidence and draw a different conclusion.

The definitions for microevolution and macroevolution are pretty standard. You're mistaken. Microevolution refers to changes within a species whereas macroevolution refers to one species evolving into an entirely new species. As for quotes taken out of context, that's a common misleading tactic used by evolutionists over and over. Take a look at the following quotes. Evolutionists would have you believe that the writer later says in the remaining text.."No wait, sorry, I didn't mean that at all what I meant to say was something totally different" If this is the case then the writer should get his or her thoughts together before submitting their work: "The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory, Is it then a science or faith?" L. H. Matthews, Introduction to Origin of the Species, by Charles Darwin (1971 edition) pp x, xi (1971 edition) "Every time I write a paper on the origin of life, I determine I will never write another one, because there is too much speculation running after too few facts." Francis Crick, Life itself (1981) p 153[Crick received a Nobel Prize for discovering the structure of DNA] "The over-riding supremacy of the myth has created a widespread illusion that the theory of evolution was all but proved one hundred years ago and that all subsequent biological research, paleontological, zoological and in the newer branches of genetic and molecular biology has provided ever - increasing evidence of Darwinian ideas" Michael Denton, Evolultion: A theory in Crisis (1985) p 327 "The irony is devasting. The main purpose of Darwinism was to drive every last trace of an incredible God from biology. But the theory replaces God with an evenmore incredible deity, omnipotent chance." Rosazak, Unfinished Animal (1975) pp 101 - 102 "The evidence for Darwinism is not only grossly inadequate, it's systematically distorted. I'm convinced that sometime in the no too distant future people will look back in amazement and say, "How could anyone have believed this? Darwinism is merely materialistic philosophy masquerading as science." Honathan Well, Ph D in molecular and cell biology, specializ in vertebrate embryology, 1994, from UC Berkeley

With regard to the list of scientists. What areas do you still feel have nothing to do with the theory of evolution? From what I've studied evolution relies heavily on most of them.

I agree so much with you, Thank You!