e that mankind follows the evolutionary line as well, coming from ancestors who were not in fact human, but some sort of early man. A creature more primitive, with a smaller brain and more apelike features. Findings such as Peking Man, Neanderthal Man, Homo Robustus, Homo Erectus and other hominid species all point to human evolution. Factually, evolution far outweighs Creationism as a valid theory.Creationism, while in all ways Biblical and worthy of respect, is not, to me, a logical theory. First of all, Creationism defies modern scientific data. Creationists claim that the Earth is much younger than the Evolutionists claim, despite data from Carbon-14 readings that find the Earth to be billions of years old. Much of their argument rests in twisting of information, in rewording scientific data, and attempting to disprove current scientific methods and instruments. As in people, I see negative enforcement as an admission of guilt and fallacy, and, thus, cannot accept the arguments of Creationists as worthy methods of debate. Also, the Creationist view is based on the Bible, which itself is a man-made collection of stories written by an ancient, Middle Eastern people. To me, basing the history of the world, the history of mankind, on a book, no matter how divinely inspired, is illogical. Now, if the Bible could be supported with sound scientific evidence, then Creationism would be hard to disprove. However, Biblical claims are often quite the opposite. They tend to be contrary to current findings, giving rise to criticism and question of authenticity. The Creationist view appears to be a view based on what ones mother and father told them, not what educated humans have found to be true. Human origin is a topic that can never truly be proven. While one can find evidence to support one side or the other, a clear-cut account of what actually happen is quite impossible. Therefore, humans must attempt to rationally and object...
