While I'm sober let me say this.
Kas, let's not beat around the bush here. You are on a different frequency from everyone else in terms of science, so don't bullshit around with "needing more proof". Others start nothing or from what we have learned from the study of the universe, but you start from a set of assumed truths are all religious in nature. Meaning that anything that conflicts with your theological dogma, no matter how well proven, you will not believe. Unless Jesus comes and specifically tells you evolution is real you will not believe it. So don't come forward this this horseshit ridiculous notion of your own fairness and impartiality with regards to all theories.
Don't say you're open to the theory of evolution if more proof is provided, or that you think creationism is the well-proven theory, or that in your informed judgement (the expert credibility of which is hardly fucking astronomical) Darwinism just wrong. None of those things are even remotely true. Certainly most of all don't accuse others of being closed-minded towards your own ideas. You have one problem alone with Darwin's theories, and that is that they conflict with a strict fundamentalist asinine interpretation of Genesis. The prevailing beliefs in the scientific community about how our world came to be -- evolution and the big bang theory -- start in a vaccuum, which is how the study of the universe is supposed to take place.
You and your ilk's so-called "study of the universe" takes place beginning from an absolute faith what you have read in the Bible: that God made the world 6000 years ago and everything on it, including the bloody unicorns. And if you stare at the universe absolutely certain that everything you will find will say that the Bible is right, goddamnit if you won't find proof that the Bible is right. But that's not how science works, Kas. I'm sorry to say but everytime faith is imposed on science the findings are always wrong, wrong and wrong.
The idea that you would even argue that creationism is scientifically valid is horseshit when you consider that the centerpiece of your vaunted theory is the most scientifically illogical, comically ridiculous figure since Santa Claus. Believe in what you want. If theologically you want to argue that God is real, have at it. But don't drag theology into science. There is a reason they call science "science" and not "the family fun god and Jesus hour". Science is a discipline just like theology and philosophy and art and music. It has specific boundaries that simply do not include preexisting beliefs and theological assumptions.
If you want your beliefs taught in school, fine. In fact I want your beliefs taught in school. And Aquinas' and even Augustine's, too. Contact your local congressman and tell him you want a new course added. It will be called "Modern Christian Philosophy" and it will go into the humanities department or the theology department, or what have you. But if you want to argue theories that have no
scientific basis, keep them out of the science classroom.
