I would certainly be worried about them but at the same time you have to accept that it's their choice. It's difficult to see that point of view since it's so irrational and assumes way too much.

note: in this illustration 'science' (S) is non partisan fact. 'scientists' (ES) are evolutionary in belief.

ES say that the universe is billions and billions of years old. S says that 1/3 of the stars are called blue stars, and they burn so hot that they could not have existed billions of years because they would have burn out totally before that time frame.

ES say the earth is millions and millions of years old. S says that carbon 14, essential in every life form, could not have existed for more than 25,000 years.

ES say they have evolutionary proof of their darwinian doctrine in a tooth found in the state of Nebraska. S says that in 1922 this discovered tooth belonged to a PIG, and proves nothing. hence called (sarcastically) the Nebraska man. btw, ES are still defensive of this farce, to this day.

ES say there was a 'big bang' that created all that exists. S says at this same time, there was nothing, not even a 'black hole' or vaccum, so what exploded?

ES say that all cells, both living and non-living, were created by a 'random selection' process. S says that the DNA of a living cell is so complicated that it is IMPOSSIBLE to have happened by any other method than by an intelligent designer. a major factor why the I.D. movement was created from the scientific 'think tanks' (see the discovery institute) to discredit darwinism and explain the truth of creation, without specifying a Creator.

ES say they can prove that IDers are wrong. and that there is no intelligently designed matter in the universe. ID says that the proof of the fallicies of evolution necessitated a scientific, but non-theistic methodology, to explain the beginning and existance of all things, from as large as the cosmos, to as small as the thousands of DNA in a single cell. (btw, creationists are standing back and enjoying this battle of the non-believers.)

so, by continually being proven wrong by the other non-theistic scientists,(ID) that it is ES that are irrational, and assume way to much.

Stars can be created through matter coming together or whatever does it. Not everything has been in its current form for those billions of years.

Doesn't the carbon cycle start over after it runs out?

You got me there.

I don't know. Ask a scientist.

Lots of great things happened by accident. Just becasue something is complicated doesn't mean it was designed by another entity. There's also plenty of faults with the structure of an organism, like brain cells not being replaced when they die or mental illness.

Creationists believe in a specific kind of intelligent design. That counts. And yes, both sides (non-theistic sides) are using science and both have valid points and valid research. Neither side, however can yet claim victory, nor is there any indication that either side is correct.

ID supporters just assume that if something is complex enough, it had to be designed by something else.

1. Evolution is not random chance. The specific mutations that occur are random but those that give the organism a better chance for survival are the ones that survive. That's not random, it's survival of the fittest.

2. Not all evolutionists thins that's is possible to prove Intelligent Design as wrong. That would involve proving there there is fact some sort of god which is not currently possible. Logical "proof" is interesting but science does not always follow what our logic dictates.

3. Unless someone was there during the evolution of a creature (on a macro scale) they can not say it's impossible for it be designed by someone or that it evolved on its own. Someone watching wouldn't even solve the problem since it's always possible for the being to unknown to the person watching.

there are only 2 choices for the "origin of the species". either the cosmos and all that exists, down to the celluar configuration of DNA, was originated by an intelligent designer, or not. evolution says there is no designer, hence the only other choice is that everything began by random selections of cellular configuration. (evolution) the odds of this happening are so unlikely, that many non-theistic scientists now believe that the origin of all things has to be by an intelligent designer. essentially God, but without specific identification. that is the foundational differences of the two schools of beliefs.

actually, it is possible to prove there is an intelligent designer. by the results. there ar over a million microscopic hooks necessary to hold a feather together. was this by design,(ID) or did it just randomly happen. (evolution) at some point, the odds are so outrageous that only one belief system is possible. for example, the feather. try to calculate the odds that a million hooklets began as unorganized cells. they had to be the correct composition, at a very specific length,with the hooks being the exact curveature to hold on to the body of the feather. your now talking millions and millions to one. multiply this by the number of feathers per bird. then multiply that number by the billions of birds alive today, or that have ever existed. that number is so small, so microscopic, that it is virtually impossible. their conclusion? there must be an intelligent designer behind these creations.
the number of scientists that believe that this is the beginning of the end for darwinian evoultionism continues to grow. for more, check out the scientific 'think tank' called discovery.

That doesn't "prove" anything. Natural selection and random selection are not the same thing. It didn't accidentally fall together. The feather evolved through survival of the fittest. Over millions of years, only things with feathers that worked survived and reproduced.

Since I tend to freak out when people blatantly ignore science, I'm done with this topic. Good luck butler! You've got it exactly right.

actually all my information is based on scientific data. so you must be "freaking out" because you cant change the data to support you ideas.

*dies laughing*

isn't that better than saying "nothing created something, nowhere?" and despite the odds (see above) this happened randomly, not be design?