Atheist Professor Converts to Christianity.

[UllysesS.Archer]

Got the faith eh? He should have been an agnostic, the only rational position on God.

700 Club, has to be.

Wrong! It wasn't 700 Club! Not even an affiliate. So tell us, why didn't you watch it, PMH? Why were you afraid to listen to a scientist explain how creationism makes more sense and how it led to his becoming a Christian? Do you not want the facts to confuse you? The evidence? Why comment on a thread that you refuse to even view the video in OP. Is your faith in Atheism so weak that you fear being converted by hearing the truth?

ID'iot creationism makes no sense.

Makes more sense than evolution, where is that missing link at anyway? Oh yeah, they can't find it.

There are many hominids linking our early ape-like ancestors to the modern Homo sapiens sapiens.

hominids evolution scholarly article - Google Scholar

I did check it out, and I can find just as many articles disavowing evolution.

However, do you have the intestinal fortitude to admit, that evolution, is a theory, and not proven fact?

I have no problem admitting that my faith, is just that, faith, not based upon anything other than theory, and the belief that 12 men would not conspire together, to be put to death and persecuted for something they knew to be a lie. (while it is true that many people have died for a lie, those that do, usually believe that lie to be the truth.)

 

[Coloradomtnman]

I watched it. It was the same dishonest creationist logic that they always use. Debunked over and over, but all creationists still use it, being creationists believe they have special dispensation from God that allows them to lie for the cause. That's why you can't trust anything a creationist says.

Debunked by whom? For all evolutionists have is theories, hmm, all creationists have is theories, faith, and The Word. So much for debunking creationism.

Science has several, dove-tailing, inter-working theories of speciation. Evolution is an observed fact i.e. domesticated animals and crops. The Theory of Natural Selection is one of the theories that attempts to describe, explain, and make accurate predictions of the fact of evolution.

Creationism isn't a theory as it would have to be connected scientifically to a being outside the purview of science. It also subverts the scientific process by starting with the answer, God, and attempting to fit the data to that answer instead of fitting the answer to the data. Faith isn't a virtue when it comes to Science, and the Bible isn't a reliable source of scientific information having been written by nomadic sheep herders during the Bronze Age.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Got the faith eh? He should have been an agnostic, the only rational position on God.

700 Club, has to be.

Wrong! It wasn't 700 Club! Not even an affiliate. So tell us, why didn't you watch it, PMH? Why were you afraid to listen to a scientist explain how creationism makes more sense and how it led to his becoming a Christian? Do you not want the facts to confuse you? The evidence? Why comment on a thread that you refuse to even view the video in OP. Is your faith in Atheism so weak that you fear being converted by hearing the truth?

ID'iot creationism makes no sense.

Makes more sense than evolution, where is that missing link at anyway? Oh yeah, they can't find it.

There are many hominids linking our early ape-like ancestors to the modern Homo sapiens sapiens.

hominids evolution scholarly article - Google Scholar

I did check it out, and I can find just as many articles disavowing evolution.

However, do you have the intestinal fortitude to admit, that evolution, is a theory, and not proven fact?

I have no problem admitting that my faith, is just that, faith, not based upon anything other than theory, and the belief that 12 men would not conspire together, to be put to death and persecuted for something they knew to be a lie. (while it is true that many people have died for a lie, those that do, usually believe that lie to be the truth.)

I'm sorry, I don't think you're lying, but you can not find any scholarly articles -meaning peer-reviewed with repeatable methodologies in scientific journals- of biologists, geologists, chemists, or anyone in a field-related science disavowing evolution. Not one. Please prove me wrong.

Evolution is an observed fact. Your DNA is slightly different from your parents: that's evolution. Extrapolate that by tens of thousands of generations and your off-spring's DNA may be sufficiently different from your parents as to render that offspring unrecognizable as the same species. Viral mutation is evolution. Adaptation is evolution. The Theory of Natural Selection attempts to explain, describe, and make predictions of the fact that evolution happens.

I don't believe in theories. They require no faith. They are not fact or truth but are human attempts to align our thinking more closely to objective reality and they will never entirely succeed because objective reality can not be translated into words or math and remain unfiltered and objective. So, no, the faith is all yours.

The Apostles died for what they believed to be true. They were martyrs. Many religions have martyrs. What makes yours so special?

 

[DriftingSand]

Science v. Religion of Atheism

Very good!!! Truth is light and darkness flees from it. The man in the clip finally gets it!!

 

[Igrok_]

Nice turn!

 

[DriftingSand]

Wrong! It wasn't 700 Club! Not even an affiliate. So tell us, why didn't you watch it, PMH? Why were you afraid to listen to a scientist explain how creationism makes more sense and how it led to his becoming a Christian? Do you not want the facts to confuse you? The evidence? Why comment on a thread that you refuse to even view the video in OP. Is your faith in Atheism so weak that you fear being converted by hearing the truth?

ID'iot creationism makes no sense.

Makes more sense than evolution, where is that missing link at anyway? Oh yeah, they can't find it.

There are many hominids linking our early ape-like ancestors to the modern Homo sapiens sapiens.

hominids evolution scholarly article - Google Scholar

I did check it out, and I can find just as many articles disavowing evolution.

However, do you have the intestinal fortitude to admit, that evolution, is a theory, and not proven fact?

I have no problem admitting that my faith, is just that, faith, not based upon anything other than theory, and the belief that 12 men would not conspire together, to be put to death and persecuted for something they knew to be a lie. (while it is true that many people have died for a lie, those that do, usually believe that lie to be the truth.)

I'm sorry, I don't think you're lying, but you can not find any scholarly articles -meaning peer-reviewed with repeatable methodologies in scientific journals- of biologists, geologists, chemists, or anyone in a field-related science disavowing evolution. Not one. Please prove me wrong.

Evolution is an observed fact. Your DNA is slightly different from your parents: that's evolution. Extrapolate that by tens of thousands of generations and your off-spring's DNA may be sufficiently different from your parents as to render that offspring unrecognizable as the same species. Viral mutation is evolution. Adaptation is evolution. The Theory of Natural Selection attempts to explain, describe, and make predictions of the fact that evolution happens.

I don't believe in theories. They require no faith. They are not fact or truth but are human attempts to align our thinking more closely to objective reality and they will never entirely succeed because objective reality can not be translated into words or math and remain unfiltered and objective. So, no, the faith is all yours.

The Apostles died for what they believed to be true. They were martyrs. Many religions have martyrs. What makes yours so special?

This notion of "peer-reviewed articles" is a total misnomer. That's like a KKKer saying that any article pertaining to KKK ideology has no validity unless and until it has been reviewed by all members of the KKK.

The fact of the matter is that there are thousands of respected, educated scientists who are also Christians who believe in the Creation account of origins.

Home The Institute for Creation Research
The Center for Scientific Creation Home of the Hydroplate Theory
Answers in Genesis
Creation Science Today - Scientific evidence for creation

The list goes on. The scientists who belong to these organizations ARE "peers."

 

[mamooth]

When I point out that how so many creationists believe that God has issued them a license to behave badly, it's nice of DriftingSand to stop by and confirm the point.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Wrong! It wasn't 700 Club! Not even an affiliate. So tell us, why didn't you watch it, PMH? Why were you afraid to listen to a scientist explain how creationism makes more sense and how it led to his becoming a Christian? Do you not want the facts to confuse you? The evidence? Why comment on a thread that you refuse to even view the video in OP. Is your faith in Atheism so weak that you fear being converted by hearing the truth?

ID'iot creationism makes no sense.

Makes more sense than evolution, where is that missing link at anyway? Oh yeah, they can't find it.

There are many hominids linking our early ape-like ancestors to the modern Homo sapiens sapiens.

hominids evolution scholarly article - Google Scholar

I did check it out, and I can find just as many articles disavowing evolution.

However, do you have the intestinal fortitude to admit, that evolution, is a theory, and not proven fact?

I have no problem admitting that my faith, is just that, faith, not based upon anything other than theory, and the belief that 12 men would not conspire together, to be put to death and persecuted for something they knew to be a lie. (while it is true that many people have died for a lie, those that do, usually believe that lie to be the truth.)

I'm sorry, I don't think you're lying, but you can not find any scholarly articles -meaning peer-reviewed with repeatable methodologies in scientific journals- of biologists, geologists, chemists, or anyone in a field-related science disavowing evolution. Not one. Please prove me wrong.

Evolution is an observed fact. Your DNA is slightly different from your parents: that's evolution. Extrapolate that by tens of thousands of generations and your off-spring's DNA may be sufficiently different from your parents as to render that offspring unrecognizable as the same species. Viral mutation is evolution. Adaptation is evolution. The Theory of Natural Selection attempts to explain, describe, and make predictions of the fact that evolution happens.

I don't believe in theories. They require no faith. They are not fact or truth but are human attempts to align our thinking more closely to objective reality and they will never entirely succeed because objective reality can not be translated into words or math and remain unfiltered and objective. So, no, the faith is all yours.

The Apostles died for what they believed to be true. They were martyrs. Many religions have martyrs. What makes yours so special?

That argument was destroyed years ago. I'm surprised you do not know about it. The evolutionists claimed that they could trace hominids seven millions years to early man. They presented evidence to a Dr. Lind claiming this proved their theory. The response was Mrs. Leakey's discovery which was reported in TIME Magazine on November 10,1975 page 93 made the chart obsolete. The response was not necessarily, they heard about the discovery but they simply believe it moves man back 3 millions years. An overlap in time. Dr. Lind explained that that would blow their theory of evolution to pieces. Because the 3 million year period wiped out 2/3 of their chart. How could man evolve from Australophithecus if man was already here one million years before them? (See Bones of Contention by Marvin Lubenov)

When confronted with this the man who was in charge of the project that was funding the education of evolution was dumbfounded. He knew he had been wrong and could not ague the science. He decided to ask further questions and wanted to know what Dr. Lind thought of the Peking man. He admitted that he had already heard about the missing bones. Dr. Lind explained yes, the Peking bones were well guarded in China by their finders. Two french scientists who were permitted to study them decided they were just animal bones.


Then the bones mysteriously disappeared during WWII!

So there you have it. The Peking Man was put in with the other questionable species like Piltdown Man who was built up from the jawbone of a modern ape and fossilized human skull.......and Hesperopithecus, which was a horrible blunder, This one "man" being built up from one tooth of an extinct pig! (See the Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution by William R. Fix -New York, Macmillan Publishing Company 1984)

What about the Neanderthal man? Their brains were 13% larger than the average modern and not a single reputable scientist thinks its a missing link - see Buried Alive: The Startling Truth about Neaderthal Man by Dr. Jack Couzzo 1998.

And last but not least there is LUCY! What about LUCY? Doesn't she prove evolution? After all, she had long forearms, short legs, curved fingers and was 3 foot tall! Lucy's an ape. Not a missing link.

Oh and Homo Erectus which was made up fro the scullcap of a gibbon ( large ape) and a human thigh bone? The Leiden Museum and the American Museum of Natural history have removed their displays! ha! ha!

see Bones of Contentions by marvin Lubenow pg. 86 and Creation Seminar #3 by Dr. Kent Hovind.

One final note. The dating methods used by these evolutionists are off. Using the same radiometric methods - Did you know that snails were carbon dated as being 27,000 years old and they were still alive? See Science (1984)Volume 224, pp. 58-61. Who knows how old the universe is? Only God. That's who. Who is God? Jesus Christ. That's who. He created it all - see John 1:1 - here is yet another example of the error of their scientific methods for dating -

Lava from Mt. St. Helens was dated by the Potassium Argon method and was estimated to be between 340,000 - to 3 million years old. It erupted in 1980.

You see? It's all guess work. Evolution is a lie. Even Darwin admitted it on his death bed. He admitted he was wrong. You should too, mountain man.

Creationism is based on scientific evidence and Biblical truth whereas the entire theory of evolution is a hoax now uncovered. Thank you for reading!

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

When I point out that how so many creationists believe that God has issued them a license to behave badly, it's nice of DriftingSand to stop by and confirm the point.

I would say that the evolutionists who tried to deceive people falsifying evidence and creating myths do not have a license to behave in such a way. Don't you agree?

 

[mamooth]

Yes, both of those evolutionists who faked data were bad.

So why are you dishonestly claiming all evolutionists act that way? After all, it was the other evolutionists who uncovered the fraud.

You would seem to be confirming my point as well.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Yes, both of those evolutionists who faked data were bad.

So why are you dishonestly claiming all evolutionists act that way? After all, it was the other evolutionists who uncovered the fraud.

You would seem to be confirming my point as well.

Do you not understand that they falsified this evidence because there has not been any? That everything they have been teaching is based on a lie? How can you justify that level of deceit? Shouldn't this be a huge question mark in your heads as to why these evolutionists went to such extreme measures and the communist nations who assisted them in the cover up? Do you know why communist nations are set on not permitting others to believe creationism is the truth? Because it proves the bible is true and they are avowed enemies of God Almighty. Darwin is the spiritual father of Communists. Without him everything else begins to fall apart. How else will they justify giving the sucker fish more water rights than human beings? Turtles more rights than land owners and cattle? it goes on and on.............. THINK. You're eternal life depends upon it.

For other examples of faulty dating, see Kent Hovind's Creation Seminar #1. Jack Chick Publications has it available.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Got the faith eh? He should have been an agnostic, the only rational position on God.

700 Club, has to be.

Wrong! It wasn't 700 Club! Not even an affiliate. So tell us, why didn't you watch it, PMH? Why were you afraid to listen to a scientist explain how creationism makes more sense and how it led to his becoming a Christian? Do you not want the facts to confuse you? The evidence? Why comment on a thread that you refuse to even view the video in OP. Is your faith in Atheism so weak that you fear being converted by hearing the truth?

ID'iot creationism makes no sense.

Makes more sense than evolution, where is that missing link at anyway? Oh yeah, they can't find it.

You are about 60 years out of date, Arch.....

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Yes, both of those evolutionists who faked data were bad.

So why are you dishonestly claiming all evolutionists act that way? After all, it was the other evolutionists who uncovered the fraud.

You would seem to be confirming my point as well.

To be clear there were far more than two evolutionists involved in the falsifying of EVIDENCE AND data concerning all of these discoveries and your eluding to there being only two is highly dishonest.

I do give you credit for admitting as much as you did. I doubt most would.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Got the faith eh? He should have been an agnostic, the only rational position on God.

700 Club, has to be.

Wrong! It wasn't 700 Club! Not even an affiliate. So tell us, why didn't you watch it, PMH? Why were you afraid to listen to a scientist explain how creationism makes more sense and how it led to his becoming a Christian? Do you not want the facts to confuse you? The evidence? Why comment on a thread that you refuse to even view the video in OP. Is your faith in Atheism so weak that you fear being converted by hearing the truth?

ID'iot creationism makes no sense.

Makes more sense than evolution, where is that missing link at anyway? Oh yeah, they can't find it.

You are about 60 years out of date, Arch.....

You better read the update because these days? You're the one out of the loop here, Vandal.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Mamooth are you aware of the story concerning the discovery of the ark and the subsequent cover up on the story?

 

[Hollie]

Got the faith eh? He should have been an agnostic, the only rational position on God.

700 Club, has to be.

Wrong! It wasn't 700 Club! Not even an affiliate. So tell us, why didn't you watch it, PMH? Why were you afraid to listen to a scientist explain how creationism makes more sense and how it led to his becoming a Christian? Do you not want the facts to confuse you? The evidence? Why comment on a thread that you refuse to even view the video in OP. Is your faith in Atheism so weak that you fear being converted by hearing the truth?

ID'iot creationism makes no sense.

Makes more sense than evolution, where is that missing link at anyway? Oh yeah, they can't find it.

There are many hominids linking our early ape-like ancestors to the modern Homo sapiens sapiens.

hominids evolution scholarly article - Google Scholar

I did check it out, and I can find just as many articles disavowing evolution.

However, do you have the intestinal fortitude to admit, that evolution, is a theory, and not proven fact?

I have no problem admitting that my faith, is just that, faith, not based upon anything other than theory, and the belief that 12 men would not conspire together, to be put to death and persecuted for something they knew to be a lie. (while it is true that many people have died for a lie, those that do, usually believe that lie to be the truth.)

The problem you have is that the articles you can find disavowing evolution are most frequently issued by fundamentalist Christian ministries. Outside of fundamentalist Christianity, there does not exist such an anti-science agenda.

 

[Hollie]

Mamooth are you aware of the story concerning the discovery of the ark and the subsequent cover up on the story?

Most are aware of the silly conspiracy theories promoted by christian extremists.

 

[Hollie]

ID'iot creationism makes no sense.

Makes more sense than evolution, where is that missing link at anyway? Oh yeah, they can't find it.

There are many hominids linking our early ape-like ancestors to the modern Homo sapiens sapiens.

hominids evolution scholarly article - Google Scholar

I did check it out, and I can find just as many articles disavowing evolution.

However, do you have the intestinal fortitude to admit, that evolution, is a theory, and not proven fact?

I have no problem admitting that my faith, is just that, faith, not based upon anything other than theory, and the belief that 12 men would not conspire together, to be put to death and persecuted for something they knew to be a lie. (while it is true that many people have died for a lie, those that do, usually believe that lie to be the truth.)

I'm sorry, I don't think you're lying, but you can not find any scholarly articles -meaning peer-reviewed with repeatable methodologies in scientific journals- of biologists, geologists, chemists, or anyone in a field-related science disavowing evolution. Not one. Please prove me wrong.

Evolution is an observed fact. Your DNA is slightly different from your parents: that's evolution. Extrapolate that by tens of thousands of generations and your off-spring's DNA may be sufficiently different from your parents as to render that offspring unrecognizable as the same species. Viral mutation is evolution. Adaptation is evolution. The Theory of Natural Selection attempts to explain, describe, and make predictions of the fact that evolution happens.

I don't believe in theories. They require no faith. They are not fact or truth but are human attempts to align our thinking more closely to objective reality and they will never entirely succeed because objective reality can not be translated into words or math and remain unfiltered and objective. So, no, the faith is all yours.

The Apostles died for what they believed to be true. They were martyrs. Many religions have martyrs. What makes yours so special?

That argument was destroyed years ago. I'm surprised you do not know about it. The evolutionists claimed that they could trace hominids seven millions years to early man. They presented evidence to a Dr. Lind claiming this proved their theory. The response was Mrs. Leakey's discovery which was reported in TIME Magazine on November 10,1975 page 93 made the chart obsolete. The response was not necessarily, they heard about the discovery but they simply believe it moves man back 3 millions years. An overlap in time. Dr. Lind explained that that would blow their theory of evolution to pieces. Because the 3 million year period wiped out 2/3 of their chart. How could man evolve from Australophithecus if man was already here one million years before them? (See Bones of Contention by Marvin Lubenov)

When confronted with this the man who was in charge of the project that was funding the education of evolution was dumbfounded. He knew he had been wrong and could not ague the science. He decided to ask further questions and wanted to know what Dr. Lind thought of the Peking man. He admitted that he had already heard about the missing bones. Dr. Lind explained yes, the Peking bones were well guarded in China by their finders. Two french scientists who were permitted to study them decided they were just animal bones.


Then the bones mysteriously disappeared during WWII!

So there you have it. The Peking Man was put in with the other questionable species like Piltdown Man who was built up from the jawbone of a modern ape and fossilized human skull.......and Hesperopithecus, which was a horrible blunder, This one "man" being built up from one tooth of an extinct pig! (See the Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution by William R. Fix -New York, Macmillan Publishing Company 1984)

What about the Neanderthal man? Their brains were 13% larger than the average modern and not a single reputable scientist thinks its a missing link - see Buried Alive: The Startling Truth about Neaderthal Man by Dr. Jack Couzzo 1998.

And last but not least there is LUCY! What about LUCY? Doesn't she prove evolution? After all, she had long forearms, short legs, curved fingers and was 3 foot tall! Lucy's an ape. Not a missing link.

Oh and Homo Erectus which was made up fro the scullcap of a gibbon ( large ape) and a human thigh bone? The Leiden Museum and the American Museum of Natural history have removed their displays! ha! ha!

see Bones of Contentions by marvin Lubenow pg. 86 and Creation Seminar #3 by Dr. Kent Hovind.

One final note. The dating methods used by these evolutionists are off. Using the same radiometric methods - Did you know that snails were carbon dated as being 27,000 years old and they were still alive? See Science (1984)Volume 224, pp. 58-61. Who knows how old the universe is? Only God. That's who. Who is God? Jesus Christ. That's who. He created it all - see John 1:1 - here is yet another example of the error of their scientific methods for dating -

Lava from Mt. St. Helens was dated by the Potassium Argon method and was estimated to be between 340,000 - to 3 million years old. It erupted in 1980.

You see? It's all guess work. Evolution is a lie. Even Darwin admitted it on his death bed. He admitted he was wrong. You should too, mountain man.

Creationism is based on scientific evidence and Biblical truth whereas the entire theory of evolution is a hoax now uncovered. Thank you for reading!

Kent Hovind is a fraud. That you would promote a fraud as supportive of your beliefs speaks volumes.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Here is more evidence. During a flight from Tunisia to Erivan in the summer of 1945 a Russian pilot snapped photographs of the Ark on Mount Ararat at an altittude of 20,000 ft. (photographed while flying over) The Russians studied the photographs carefully and said that they believed it to be Noah's ark. On 2/22/74 United Press international quoted Senator Frank E. Moss, Chairman of the Senate Space Committee - a U.S. Satellite photographed an object on Mt. Ararat the same size and shape of the ark. KGB Nicolai Savich, the second Secretary of the Council for the Affairs of religious sects was pushing to get one of their best KGB agents, Metropolitan Nikodim, elected as a president to the World Council of Churches. Every priest in the Soviet Union is an agent of the secret police - see Peter Deriabin - Ex - communist agent, July 20, 1961, Chronicle Telegram, Elyria, Ohio. Metropolitan Nikodim elected to the presidency of the World Council of Churches on December 6, 1975. LA Times, Dec. 7, 1975. The official stance from the World Council of Churches (this is an anti-Christ system) is that the ark never existed. Years later an exploration team led by scientists was on the brink of uncovering the truth and were arrested and taken away by the Turkish police. Later it was revealed this was ordered by the Russians because they did not want the world finding out about the ark that is resting on Mt. Ararat. But the 1945 incident was not the first for the Russians.

Prior to this in 1916, a Russian pilot on the 3-D Caucasian Aviation Detachment flew over Mt. Ararat. He spotted something at the 14,000 ft. level and thought it was a submarine. He reported to his captain who said, take me up there.

He said I believe that strange craft is Noah's ark. He told the man you have made the most amazing discovery of the age. The word reached Czar, Nicholas of Russia. He dispatched orders for a scientific ground expedition to scale Ararat to ascertain the facts.

150 Army engineers and specialists from the 14th Battalion scaled Mt. Arrarat in two columns. One party of 50 men were stopped by a swamp infested with deadly adder snakes and swarms of insects.....they could see the ark but had to turn back. The team of 100 men reached the ark at last and they took photographs, and measurements, they said it was 500 ft. long, the entire rear end was in ice. Inside the ark they found rooms with cages from the floor to the ceiling. They were amazed. They said they found a room large enough to hold dinosaurs. They found a dark brown substance like varnish inside and outside and the bible says the ark was to be pitched within and without with pitch. Gen.6:14

All the documents proved scientifically that the ark existed were given to a Russian soldier. His mission was to place the information in the hands of the Czar. By the time he reached Moscow, the city was aflame with revolution, The Boshevik (Communist) army was in control.

Rumor has it, he was captured and the documents fell into the hands of Communist leader, Leon Trosky. The messenger was silenced, he was shot to death.

1955, on his 3rd trip up Mt. Ararat, Ferdinand Navarra took his 11 year old son with him. The book spotted a large dark mass in the ice, the shape of a boat. The father dug through the ice and on July 6,1955 he found a piece of hand tooled timber. They examined the wood and it was estimated to be 4000 yrs old or more.

Once again the Communists have been proven to try and prevent the world from learning that the bible is true and what the bible teaches is true - by trying to bury the evidence - but it still comes out! Because the truth will always prevail in the end. It will always prevail in the end.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

ID'iot creationism makes no sense.

Makes more sense than evolution, where is that missing link at anyway? Oh yeah, they can't find it.

There are many hominids linking our early ape-like ancestors to the modern Homo sapiens sapiens.

hominids evolution scholarly article - Google Scholar

I did check it out, and I can find just as many articles disavowing evolution.

However, do you have the intestinal fortitude to admit, that evolution, is a theory, and not proven fact?

I have no problem admitting that my faith, is just that, faith, not based upon anything other than theory, and the belief that 12 men would not conspire together, to be put to death and persecuted for something they knew to be a lie. (while it is true that many people have died for a lie, those that do, usually believe that lie to be the truth.)

I'm sorry, I don't think you're lying, but you can not find any scholarly articles -meaning peer-reviewed with repeatable methodologies in scientific journals- of biologists, geologists, chemists, or anyone in a field-related science disavowing evolution. Not one. Please prove me wrong.

Evolution is an observed fact. Your DNA is slightly different from your parents: that's evolution. Extrapolate that by tens of thousands of generations and your off-spring's DNA may be sufficiently different from your parents as to render that offspring unrecognizable as the same species. Viral mutation is evolution. Adaptation is evolution. The Theory of Natural Selection attempts to explain, describe, and make predictions of the fact that evolution happens.

I don't believe in theories. They require no faith. They are not fact or truth but are human attempts to align our thinking more closely to objective reality and they will never entirely succeed because objective reality can not be translated into words or math and remain unfiltered and objective. So, no, the faith is all yours.

The Apostles died for what they believed to be true. They were martyrs. Many religions have martyrs. What makes yours so special?

This notion of "peer-reviewed articles" is a total misnomer. That's like a KKKer saying that any article pertaining to KKK ideology has no validity unless and until it has been reviewed by all members of the KKK.

The fact of the matter is that there are thousands of respected, educated scientists who are also Christians who believe in the Creation account of origins.

Home The Institute for Creation Research
The Center for Scientific Creation Home of the Hydroplate Theory
Answers in Genesis
Creation Science Today - Scientific evidence for creation

The list goes on. The scientists who belong to these organizations ARE "peers."

False analogy.

The KKK does not account for bias, whereas the scientific method is set up to do exactly that. Peer-review is one of the processes that attempt to weed out bias. Granted, this is a human system and bias can never be entirely eradicated, but peer review is conducted so that those who review the work to be published attempt to find flaws in the methodology. It happens all the time. A scientist's reputation is bettered for discrediting bad work, and her career benefits from it.

Scientists can be Christians. To suggest otherwise is ignorant. Scientists are people and are just as much subject to human foibles as any other person. That includes bias. But their work must be as objective as possible.

Being specialists in their fields, scientists can certainly be biased about subjects they aren't as familiar with in other fields. A Christian engineer might not fully understand the field which studies DNA. Francis Collins, the project leader of the Human Genome Project, is a born-again Christian. He thinks the Theory of Evolution through Natural Selection is the best explanation of the currently available evidence. He just believes God directed evolution. He doesn't allow his religious beliefs to taint his scientific work and his career has obviously benefitted from such a respect for the discipline.

Of course, if you just view anything that contradicts your beliefs as not credible, then a conspiracy theory works better for you than a scientific theory and you won't credit anything that goes against your beliefs. That is also known as dogma.