Oh for goodness sake Baboon-ou, stop trying to pretend that these charlatans that you find on your christian-fundamentalist websites have any kind of scientific credibility. I haven't forgotten your hero Carl Baugh and all the ducking, diving and dodging you did when I exposed him as a fraud.
Like I keep saying, my beliefs when it comes to the origins of the universe are mainstream and based very much on what current respected scientists are saying (and note here Baboon-ou that I'm talking about respected scientists . . . not half-witted and deceitful zealots like Ken Ham and Carl Baugh).
I know you don't particularly like Wikipedia (except on the very rare occasion when it supports any of your outlandish and pathetically childish notions) but even a dribbling moron like you cannot deny that Wikipedia represents a mainstream view. Well, here is Wikipedia's article on what they call the "creation-evolution controversy".
I know in the past you've proven to be too stupid to even perform the simple task of clicking on a link so I've pasted an extract here for you (yes, even though I know you're too intolerant and narrow minded to read it . . . but hey, at least I can't be accused of not trying!) . . .
"The creation–evolution controversy (also termed the creation vs. evolution debate or the origins debate) involves a recurring cultural, political, and theological dispute about the origins of the Earth, of humanity, and of other life. This debate rages most publicly in the United States, and to a lesser extent in Europe and elsewhere,[1] often portrayed as part of a culture war.[2]
The level of support for evolution is extremely high within the scientific community and in academia, with 95% of scientists supporting evolution.[3][4][5][6][7][8] Support for Abrahamic religions' accounts or other creationist alternatives is very low among scientists, and virtually nonexistent among scientists in the relevant fields.[9]
Christian fundamentalists dispute the evidence of common descent of humans and other animals as demonstrated in modern paleontology, genetics, histology and cladistics and those other sub-disciplines which are based upon the conclusions of modern evolutionary biology, geology, cosmology, and other related fields. They argue for the Abrahamic accounts of creation, framing them as reputable science ("creation science"). While the controversy has a long history,[10] today it is mainly over what constitutes good science education,[11][12] with the politics of creationism primarily focusing on the teaching of creation and evolution in public education.[13][14][15][16][17]
A 2014 Gallup survey reports, "More than four in 10 Americans continue to believe that God created humans in their present form 10,000 years ago, a view that has changed little over the past three decades. Half of Americans believe humans evolved, with the majority of these saying God guided the evolutionary process. However, the percentage who say God was not involved is rising."[18]
The
debate is sometimes portrayed as being between science and religion,
but as the United States National Academy of Sciences states:
"Today, many religious denominations accept that biological evolution has produced the diversity of living things over billions of years of Earth's history. Many have issued statements observing that evolution and the tenets of their faiths are compatible. Scientists and theologians have written eloquently about their awe and wonder at the history of the universe and of life on this planet, explaining that they see no conflict between their faith in God and the evidence for evolution. Religious denominations that do not accept the occurrence of evolution tend to be those that believe in strictly literal interpretations of religious texts."
—National Academy of Sciences,
Science, Evolution, and Creationism[19]
Okay Baboon-ou, now did you notice this bit . . . "The level of support for evolution is extremely high within the scientific community and in academia, with 95% of scientists supporting evolution."
How about this . . . "Support for Abrahamic religions' accounts or other creationist alternatives is very low among scientists, and virtually nonexistent among scientists in the relevant fields."
Do you understand? You happy clappy fundamentalist bible bashers are among a tiny minority of people stupid enough to consider "creation science" to be a real science. Everyone else thinks it's a steaming pile of horseshit so please, stop copying and pasting all this utter drivel from your answersingenesis.org website and either think for yourself or talk about something else.