banjo ray -i did infact watch the programme and only see your recommendation today.it was certainly creatively done and a lot easier for a layman than wading through darwins origin and his favoured races.he did a good job IMO of making the impossible and unproven sound convincing-that is if you dont think-hang on a mo-wheres the evidence backing up this wondrous story.at the very start i noted the fluidity of the theory and was mildly amused that a schoolboys efforts changed the parameters of dating "early life"
but i think the programme did aid the understanding of the theory.

frogprince-i read the link you supplied.i did expect to read other suggestions and i wondered what they might be.i also read pennys link,though somewhat tec for me.it seemed to me that the ICR and CMI articles did discuss points raised by these and yourself.i am unsure of the ice skater comparison.surely not much impression would be made in the ice if skater merely stood still.more convincing was the suggestion that seasonal temp change contributed to planes sinking.
for me verdict is open as far as the planes are concerned.

i find the discussion about what constitutes evolution interesting .
all the examples given were of natural selection within the limits of the kind in question.this was recognized and written of by creationists before darwin borrowed the idea and then extended it.
needless to say none of this is enough to equate to particle to people evolution.
pete.