In Response to Frank Mercers Question:

I've read through what you have written so far and am curious about your take on Intelligent Design vs. Factual Science. I would enjoy reading what you think about that issue.
------------------------------------------
Hi Frank, in response to your question about Creation vs Evolution the answer is simple, Science has never factually proven one aspect of the Theory of Evolution. I can and will post numerous articles of false deductions and even fraudulently obtained evidence that has been used to verify the false beliefs of Evolution. I believe in and will support the concept of Micro-Evolution, but Macro-Evolution the belief that all species of life on Earth had an original starting point is unproven and full of errors.

Let me explain what i mean by admitting i believe in and support Micro-Evolution and totally reject Macro Evolution. Charles Darwin sparked a revolution in scientific thought with the publication of his book, The Origin of Species, in 1859. With his concept of evolution by natural selection, Darwin attempted to render invalid the biblical idea that "every living thing produces life after its own kind."

In the first half of Species, Darwin cited evidence for "micro-evolution," or changes on a small level between species. His discovery of the several different types of finches on the Galapagos Islands with similar characteristics, derived from a common ancestor, comprised his evidence for micro-evolution. The 14 different species of finches vary according to plumage, size (from the size of a sparrow to that of a large blackbird), beak morphology, behavior and environmental habitat. They were each very different, yet closely related.

From this observation, Darwin then extrapolated his explanation for the origin of life forms from a common ancestor, or "macro-evolution." He used the evidence from the first half of his book on micro-evolution to suggest that the same mechanism could produce all life forms. However, this concept of macro-evolution is not supported by modern scientific evidence. Although we can explain and understand the mechanism behind micro-evolution, we still can only theorize about possible explanations for macro-evolution - since it has no scientifically valid occurrences.

This is my argument with the scientific Communities insistince that macro-evolution be tought to our children when it has never been nor will it ever be proven that an Ant will evolve into an Elephant given the time. Now i have no problem accepting that given 100 million and some unique changes to living conditions and habitat that Ants may some day have the potential of changing their appearance in some ways and may even grow as large as elephants if their environment allows for it, but i maintain and insist that an Ant will always be an insect and an Elephant will always remain a Mammal and never the twain shall meet.

So in conclusion, Micro-Evolution doesn't conflict with the story of Creation at all but Macro-Evolution totally distorts what is even a reasonable deduction according to not only common sense but also according to what every other field of Science has concluded up till now.