>>Open you're eyes, there is abslutely no prove of any creator, therefore the answers is most likely found in science. But then again, as history has proven time after time again, religion has rejected science over and over again while time has proven science to be right, time after time. Therefore (most) relegion has proven to be the real evil in this world, the cancer that has to be destroyed/marginalised through education and awareness. I'm confident that we will succeed doing that in the generations to come.
>
>Religion is one thing, personal faith is another. Religion is a man made institution that uses suppression and politics to dominate people. However, in practice science and religion (in political sense) are often walking hand in hand. Therefore it is important to make a difference between an evil religious system and a matter of personal faith (or opinion).
>
>Not too long ago, "science" taught that the earth was flat. But the Bible says the earth is round. Religion and science have rejected this idea until somebody proved the Bible was correct in this point. There are a lot of scientific statements written thousands of years ago, which once have been rejected, but most recently all of those have been discovered to be true.

There is one big difference between science en religion in this respect. Science will correct itself when proven wrong, religion will keep to its stance even if it proven wrong a million times, not seldomly forced with evil violence.

At least with science, I have the comfortable feeling that whatever I learn has been proven right until proven wrong by the same scientifical methodology. With religion you have the comfortable feeling that whatever has been preached and is wrong will be preached wrong forever. I don't think I have to tell you what disasterous consequences this has had in the past.

>Now everybody has the right to believe what he or she wants to believe. But to sell the evolution theory as only "proven science" and on the contrary put the creationist theory in contrast as "wild fable" is intellectually dishonest.

There is a fairly solid theory behind evolution, even there are a few questions open. Creationist are putting their energy to point to those questions to distract from the fact that there is NO prove of their conviction at all (That is quite arrogant IMO). Instead as a scientist I would try to close the gaps, rather than to debunk it enterily because it is not fully complete.

And this really iritates me like hell. Creationist are abusion this subject to hold on to their faith AT ALL COST, even if they are proven wrong a million times.

>There is no scientific proof for either of the two, and if there were found one day a definite scientific proof, there would be a shakeup in the world that nobody would miss it, and most people will come to accept it then. Until now we have some thought models that somehow look reasonable, but also produce so many open and unanswered questions, that you end up living by faith, if you believe in the one or the other.

Open and unanswered questions will most likely always be there. One will feel the need to explain every unanswered question by the existance of a god or other powers, however, most people are perfectly comfortable by accepting that there are many things in life we never will understand (see my sig).