To me the author is asking why is it so, rather than making a direct statement one way or the other. If we could step back from the earth and look at it's human history, the answer is easy to see, but not readily acceptable by many.

Cultures and belief come and go constantly, the most powerful last a few thousand years and are then overtaken by other psychological needs.

Monotheistic religion's been replacing deism, theism and animism for the last couple of thousand years and has passed it's peak. Now as will all things unsustainable in an evolutionary way, it's diminishing and another ideology is growing to take it's place. The new ideology revolves around our sciences and will probably be a belief in our ability to transcend the universe and colonise other universal bodies.

It's a simple understanding, religion relies upon perceived threats of outcomes, using psychological and physical pressure with restraint of knowledge. Our science has broken those shackles, now knowledge is available to all. Worldwide we're seeing the death throes of religion as it struggles to suppress changes empowering the entire human population, putting religion in the past with other unsupportable mythologies. It will take a few violent years, but monotheistic religions passing will come, as it has in the past to all other psychological fears and superstitions.

Stormbay:

"Worldwide we're seeing the death throes of religion....."

Religion has certainly declining in some parts of the world over the past 50 years, but the decline in those areas is more than compensated for by huge increases in other areas, for example Africa and China. So overall, your statement is completely false.

Yet the language you've used to describe religion has allowed you to create such a strange and impoverished carictature in your own mind that it doesn't surprise me to hear your opinion on the subject.

However, I do look forward to hearing any evidence you've got to back up your claim. My mind isn't closed, so go right ahead

As science is based on fact and reality, the clash is between religion and reality.

Science is perfectly happy to continue on, but the nutjobs of the religious world continue to bay at any progress that erodes their belief system and try and have the science or teaching of the science banned.

I wish they would just keep to their corner and mutter to themselves, but they continually feel the need to inflict their obsolete morality on the rest of the human species. When they get over their "god" given superiority complex and recognise the right of other people to think and act for themselves, the world will be a better place.

under one god,

While entitled to your opinion, there is some information which may interest you.

Your correct in stating that there is an apx. 2% genetic difference between humans and ape, this must me taken in the context that >90% of our DNA does not code for genes, thus protein. This makes the 2% difference in DNA of which we know the gene function more significant than it sounds.

"[all the trillions of fruit-fly mutations..have not made EVEN one non-fruitfly..[ie..no proof of evolution out of species..[into new genus]" This statement shows a rather simplistic view of genetic evolution. What did you expect... "well professor, we substituted adenine with guanine... and now its a cow!" all species are related to each other by some means, the definition of one species and the changes required to define it as another is a subjective decision made by humans with no real relevance.

"[science has..never created actual/life,..not even made a single/living cell membrane..[yet dare speculate life arose from nothing..lol]" Well, this depends on how you define life... some theories would suggest viruses and plasmids could be considered living, as they are able to adapt and replicate. If you agree with this, then science can and has created "life". as for a cell membrane, I'm quite sure that lipids can be easily formed my chemists.

"science has NEVER recorded a species changing genus..[all mutation is intra species]..genus into new genus is not valid..[has NEVER been recorded],..and science has never observed it nor recorded it..." The length of time over which evolutionary changes occur makes it difficult to observe and record events which may take thousand of years. However, observation of bacterial strains in hospitals which become resistant to various anti-biotics is a quite interesting example of inter-generational genetic mutations producing bacteria very different. The same could be said for the virus strains which change significantly from one flu season to the next.

It may be frustrating that science does not provide complete 'proof' of its various theories. However it does lead us in the right direction, and that is to the truth.

stezza..its a matter of fact..that the science hasnt the fact..[so why they persist in selling it to kids as a done deal?]

you would know that we share'..50'percent of our dna with a bannana[does this mean we decended from a banana?..[according to the insanity of science...anything can evolve into anythin..

[but the proof is..species stay stable..[within their genus..[and did not mutate into that we now have]..via any type/or/form of..'natural'..selection..[whatever'natural'means..within the confines of science methodology]...lol..even survival..of the fittest yet needs a mutant..fit enough to survive..[and the vast majority of mutants die]

science should say..our reserch reveals life only comes from life

[we see a living/sperm go into a dead egg..[within a living cell membrane]..and evolve into a living being..[which is amasing..but science should also be upfront and say;..we are completly unable to make a sperm..[or a cell membrane]..[because its scientificlly impossable to get life from dead matter...]

say THEY/think life evolved..[but because of/..gaps between species..have no verifiable/faulsifiable proof..[of one genus mutating into any other genus]...[because it dont[..it says..'we are right..and religion is wrong'..lol..yet cannot re-create even the most basic of life..[of our/own science method.]

see the gaps in the fossil record occure..EGSACTLY where science would need genus to change genus..[not one verifyable genus mutation into other genus is recorded]..thus intermediates theory is flawed/and[decieving]

see that these EXPERTS can find a miniscule bone/tooth..[and tell you specificlly what species it comes from,..thus revealing..;..these..'looks the same'..arnt scientificlly identical..!..[EVERY species bone is unique..!..][think about how this could be?,,if they are only slowly mutating..[evolving..lol]..

the absurdity of the faith..you all have in deceptions..[is the same as any..religious nutter..holding fast to the wrong idea of god/or their human messenger's,..be they saints of science/or saints of a church.

only science/pope claim infalability..,yet evolution remains a theory OF science..[not a valid science in its own right]...just as many religious nutters havnt experienced god..[many believers of evolution never done the science..[its all faith based...faulse/faith built on the messengers/message]

we have had this debate many times
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2411&page=0
they allways end in name calling..because some retard needs to have the last say

Hilarious, runner. Funniest thing I've seen all week. Now, would you like to borrow a hanky to wipe the foam away from your mouth?