This thread is doing exactly what it set out to do: distracting.

Science is evidence-based. We've been discussing evidence in other threads, such as varves and homind fossils. RAZD presented evidence here for certain fossils that are found in certain layers of rock and what the dates are for those layers of rock. In another thread he gave evidence for why the Grand Canyon is not an example of catastrophic flooding. LinearAQ asked some questions about the scientific implications of Russ' version of chemistry presented here.

The answers we get? The Bible is literally true. Evolution is a conspiracy and scientists are liars. We've heard these 100 times over here, they're easy to say. Interesting how all talk of any actual evidence flies out the window. And then some people even claim there is no evidence at all. I'd really like to take up the discussion of the hominid fossils again; no creationist here has been willing to comment on them.

I also have a recommendation to make: 30 minutes of a podcast about the scientific method. it is very accessible as it starts from scratch and explains what it is, how it helps us to learn about the world, what a theory is, how theories grow and change, how scientists have to admit they're wrong when the evidence points to this being the case, and how the evidence-based approach of science differs from faith. This is a weekly show I listen to called AstronomyCast, hosted by an amateur and a professional astronomer. It touches on a lot of things that have been discussed at various points on this forum:

http://www.universetoday.com/2008/06/02/podcast-the-scientific-method/