Linda, you stated - " Evolution has a lot of evidence to back it up. Look at the sorts of things you are claiming, e.g. 'you weren't there, how do you know'? By this same logic, we can't know about anything that happened before we were personally there to experience it."

In other words, you find it "logical" for people to tell us what happened who have no idea if it did or not and cannot even study those who 'were". And that to you is logical? To me that is unscientific and presumptuous.

Beyond recorded history (oral history) and present observations, we are basing everything on assumptions and that is fine if one wishes to toss ideas around, but to teach it as science? Makes no sense, it is not scientific at all.

Your statements and PWCCA's of "Cringing" at the idea of evolution not being taught is an example of indoctrination. That you actually have reached such a point that you are ready to accept assumptions as fact. The ongoing exclaimations of "it's a fact, it's a fact", make no sense in the light "it's a theory, it's a theory".

Linda, we do not even need hoaxes to describe the evolution agenda. We only have to point out the absence of solid facts/missing links.

Evolutionists accept that we have evolved from primitive creatures (ape like) - yet so far there have been no solid evidence for this at all. What we observe today and of the past is that humans have always been humans. Yet we are told this was not always so.....and once again it's the "once upon a time" story.

I have no problem accepting that humans have always been humans because this is what history (recorded history) has proven. In the absence of evidence to show me otherwise, why is it required of students to believe what is told to them by people who were not only not their themselves, but cannot even refer to someone that was?

micro evolution is fine, but it is a misleading term because the evolutionists have REALLY given "evolution" a bad name. Micro evolution is observable because it's simply variation within a kind. But none of these changes happen on their own without two FULLY functioning creatures (not half formed). But notice none of them actually evolve into another kind? They simply reproduce after their own kind. These things we observe and can observe from past evidence from pictures or fossil findings, oral/recorded history. No story telling required, they speak for themselves.

Linda if evolution was a solid fact, there would be no arguments because it would be like me arguing that there is a sun in the sky. Evolution can be challenged and argued because the idea is just that "an idea".

Unfortunately students dont tend to accept that because they are indoctrinated to believe it's a scientific fact, even with the absence of evidence.

That is what we see and what history dictates. The land before time is the evolution playground and has nothing at all to do with anything that can be observed or tested. That is unscientific.