"...the Bible and real science (which affirms evolution and common descent as the best fit for the evidence we find in nature). Not that I'm trying to spark that debate again, or anything. :-) "
I don't want the debate either, but your comment gives me a need to say that evolution and common descent is a really bad fit with "real science" as it has progressed in the last 20-30 years, it seems. In the simplistic concepts propounded by Darwin and as taught in school, maybe evolution and common descent made science sense in a very limited way. But the deeper the study has gone (as real science does) the more it all apparently doesn't hold up.
DNA and how it works, gene coding, the expanding understanding of the significantly greater complexity of all life forms than was thought, and the realities of huge problems in fossil records are making the hurdles bigger and bigger. The more we learn, the bigger the issues have become, and it's looking more and more like whatever the answer of how we came to be, as we are today, it's looking more and more like that's apparently not it.
I don't want the debate either, but your comment gives me a need to say that evolution and common descent is a really bad fit with "real science" as it has progressed in the last 20-30 years, it seems. In the simplistic concepts propounded by Darwin and as taught in school, maybe evolution and common descent made science sense in a very limited way. But the deeper the study has gone (as real science does) the more it all apparently doesn't hold up.
DNA and how it works, gene coding, the expanding understanding of the significantly greater complexity of all life forms than was thought, and the realities of huge problems in fossil records are making the hurdles bigger and bigger. The more we learn, the bigger the issues have become, and it's looking more and more like whatever the answer of how we came to be, as we are today, it's looking more and more like that's apparently not it.