I have no doubt we'll just have to differ on this one.

One of the most important things I've learned in life is that the vast majority of people tend to believe what they want to believe. Additionally, they tend to surround themselves with (what they accept as ) "evidence" that supports what they want to believe—and this—to ease their conscience.

I, having analyzed this issue for many years—and having no care whatsoever to taint the evidence one way or the other—have found much so-called evidence on both sides. However, just like the amalgam issue, those in favor of amalgam have skewed the evidence, played with numbers and outright lied. I have also found this in the evolution arena.

Of course, if you put the pieces together and understand that evolution is no different politically than the amalgam issue—in that powerful political forces stand to gain tremendously by it's promotion—you begin to see the larger picture and it begins to make perfect sense why these numbers are skewed and why the lies are so heavily promoted.

Once we understand that mercury escapes from amalgam, the argument for it's use is completely destroyed in the face of existing logic. Likewise, once you understand that DNA is much like a computer program, the argument for evolution becomes nearly impossible to make. "Evolutionary" changes to DNA will long destroy an organism before improving it, and the likelyhood that they will result in beneficial, symmetrical, or even matched male and female reproductive systems is astronomically low; For all practical purposes, impossible.

The logical thrust of the whole evolution concept is much like saying, "We saw a bunny on both sides of the grand canyon, therefore, it must be able to jump that far." And, the evidence that is fabricated to make it look more likely is like saying, "Hey, a bunny can jump, so, it must be able to jump over the grand canyon." People who study the evolution coverups will see the parallels of this example.

All I can say is that those interested in this subject should keep their eyes widely open for those leaps in logic that seem to say that proteins can do alot by themselves. One of the authors of the primary book promoting Chemical Evolution has finally seen this fundamental flaw in this logic and he has seen the corruption in the so-called science supporting it and abandon his own book—the book he authored—for the sake of intellectual integrity. A learned person will realize with experience how small a percentage of persons would sacrifice their pride for truth.

Again, asking anyone to believe that evolution is possible is like asking them to believe that a computer in an alternating magnetic field will become a super computer in a few million years; It's not gonna' happen and people who don't ignore the big pink elephant in the room can see this.