Because yesterday and 200,000 years ago are basically like the same thing. Polling the newspapers from yesterday - pretty much just like polling fossil records that have been in the soil for a quarter million years.

I'm sorry, but you're profoundly ignorant of the methods, experiments, and data underlying modern evolutionary theory if you think all of the evidence is from 200,000 year old fossils. The strength of the theory comes precisely from how robust it has proven through an astounding variety of orthogonal testing methods performs by independent sources.

Scientific theories only have validity if they can be tested. If they can be tested, they have predictive power. For over a century, Darwinian theory has been making predictions which have been borne out by subsequent testing, sometimes decades later.

Whatever, to each his own. You guys do your thing, I'll do mine. Difference being, I don't need to go through life with some canned, simplified explanation of everything.

I wouldn't call my grasp of evolutionary theory "canned" or "simplified". I'm not an expert by a long shot, but you're way off.

Everyone goes through life ignorant of many subjects, but it isn't something to be proud of. I don't know a lot about music theory, but I don't go around telling composers that all they have is a "canned, simplified" explanation of it, and that I'm superior because (in my ignorance) I can "think for myself" about how to write a symphony.

You seem to think that being educated with regard to a specific topic reduces the ability to make informed decisions about that topic. Quite the opposite.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com