You may not like this, but your evolution threads make it easier to understand the steps and why no kind of creator is necessary - I wish you could appreciate how exciting pure evolution is.
I don't like it but only because it is disturbing to see someone buying into the unscientific nature of the ToE. I am not here to coax individuals out of a belief, though, so I wish you the best. It just so happens that, as I've mentioned before, the more I learn the more confident I become in my beliefs which is the opposite direction you seem headed in. Interesting.
Since nothing you're doing is working, I suggest you start from the beginning again.
I still don't understand the specifics of why you say that the ToE is not scientific. Also, I do not understand why multiple verifications from multiple scientific disciplines is inadequate. I fail to see why the further consistency with sciences like geology and chemistry are not of value. Nor do I see why you think that little changes can happen but big ones can't, given the amount of time available for such things. Your insistence that there is no mechanism for such changes when all we see when we look at DNA is a mechanism that can indeed create changes, both small and large.
I suggest you make a list of your complaints against evolution, that you provide links the specifically state the case against evolution, and that you include the CV or other academic authentication of those you trust in these matters. Your own education level and why you have enough information to diss evolution on autopilot would help.
Despite your 1500+ posts, all i see is science in action. I have watched the ToE evolve, so to speak over the last 50+ years (ever since I got old enough to read about such things and understand them) and I haven't the slightest idea why you think otherwise. New findings across disciplines have done nothing but confirm the overall accuracy of the theory.
And though it is apparently hard for you to believe, your merely stating otherwise has no effect.
Evolution has successfully predicted numerous findings. Numerous. Which is a generic term for lots, in this case. (I'm trying not to get too technical, for your sake.) How could evolution, if it is wrong, make predictions time and time again that turned out to be correct? How could a wrong science with no basis in reality be right about anything, let alone tons of things?
You have no understanding of science, no understanding of the philosophy of science, no understanding that for evolution to actually be fake, a conspiracy that makes all other conspiracy theories combined look like childs play. You don't understand the concepts of theory, predictability, falsifiability, repeatability, evidence or verifiability. You don't understand that dishonest scientists get drummed out, and that if evolution were false, you guys would be able to do some of that drumming. But you can't.
You will not be able to mount a definitive response. Most likely you will totally ignore this post. Because in your world, you're doing fine, and you've accomplished a lot. In your world, the one sans information, you get to make up your own about your many achievements here, just like you have about the inaccuracies of evolution and other falsehoods. All of those things apparently satisfy you even though they have no content. You don't seem to have standards about anything.
Oh, and the condescending remarks? The come from the frustration. The frustration we feel when you make claims and expect us to accept them without so much as a hint as to why they should be true. I show you a grasshopper walking with all six legs, and you show one with four, and say that your side was right. You ignore the six legged walking because that wasn't the truth you wanted. Your four legged walker was proof positive that they never walk with six legs, even though my video showed a grasshopper walking with six legs. That is how ragged your scientific "logic" is, and you should not expect a whole crapload of roses and puppy dogs in response.
And the qualifications of your scientists? For every PhD an ID scientist has, we literally have thousands, if not tens of thousands, of PhD's who disagree. I am not throwing out numbers here for the purpose of showing that you are outgunned. I am throwing them out to ask why tens of thousands of people would get an education and spend their entire frickin' life studying falsehoods? I know PhD's. I'm related to PhD's. I know how hard they work, and how important discovery is to them. I know how dedicated they are to finding new truths, how important adding to the scientific knowledge base is, and I can't imagine for a minute they would adhere to any scientific theory that was suspect. If there was anything in the claims of the ID scientists to give them pause, it would happen. To at least enough to qualify as something besides a statistical anomaly. If it is so frickin' obvious to you that evolution is false, it should be equally obvious to the tens of thousands of scientists who are involved in disciplines that support or depend upon the ToE for the success of their research. And no scientist in his or her right mind is going to try proving something or discovering something based on blatant falsehoods.
I found an ID influenced article dated this year that said 840 scientists believe some variation on the ID theme is the explanation for life, etc. I would be willing to bet that virtually every one of those believers is also a fundamentalist in his or her religion (I don't specify christianity because I found reference to at least one muslim scientist feeling the same way.) These guys are scientists, and yet they can't come up with anything other than words to demonstrate their side of the argument. Why is that? If yo guys have nearly a thousand folks running around thinking that ID is a viable alternative, why can't they come up with anything to blow the lid off of the fraudulent nature of the ToE? Why is it so hard?
You are not a scientist. I am not a scientist. I went to college. I took science classes. I read tons of science related stuff on the Internet. I enjoy science. I have seen science change dramatically in my lifetime as new information became available. Across multiple disciplines, new discoveries have turned old knowledge upside down, time and time again. Whole theories have been tossed out as new findings showed that we were operating on faulty information. Yet nobody has touched evolution. Yet you know it is wrong.
You have ago have something besides your belief in god to go on. You have a to be able to say why the fossils are always buried in a predictable order. Why it is that fossil animal A is never found buried in the same rocks as fossil animal B. Why is it that when we have determined the age of some rocks, we can always accurately predict what will be found in those layers? Why is it that species changed over time? Why is it that 99% + of all species are now extinct? Why is it that science was able to predict that the reason that humans have 23 gene pairs instead of 24 like or ape cousins was that two genes must have merged. This prediction, which took place years before we were able to peer into genes and see such things, was born out when the paired genes were found, spliced together exactly as predicted. How was that possible if evolution sucks big time?
And you know what. ID could have been involved. We don't know everything yet. But if it was involved, it was involved via evolution. And you and yours would be much better served by finding the hand of ID inside the genes that have indeed macro evolved, and explain how it happened. You are not served by saying none of this shit happened. Because it is absolutely the best current explanation of observed phenomena.
So many questions, no ability to answer. That is your burden. Find a better way to deal with it.