Do you know what, Snail? You're boring. Bloody boring. You're not a bloody snail after all, are you? You're a limpet. Just to show how daft this is getting, just consider this statement of yours. No, really consider it: I have no reason to believe that Darwin's Theory of Evolution is untrue... Good! You are therefore accepting that we can actually use words like "true" and "untrue" in this context. So tell me this. If you see no reason to "believe" (very scientific, by the way!)that the theory is untrue, then you have reason to believe it's true. Yeah? Now one more thing. If I say evolution is true (which it is), I am not stating dogma. I am stating an overall conclusion derived from masses of evidence that long ago propelled evolution, in its general thrust, beyond any doubt that could arise via evidence and reason. There will be tweaking to be done for ever more, of course. Darwin didn't get everything right and neither have many of the subsequent workers in the field. If I say that gravity is true (which it is), that is not dogma either. It is a conclusion based on overwhelming evidence and reason. Gravity cannot be denied. Newton may not have got it quite right, Einstein may not have got it quite right, tweaking may be required but gravity is undeniable and it's perfectly OK for anyone, scientist or no, to say so. There is a big geranium in a pot on my windowsill. It is not dogma to say that. It is true. I'm looking at it right now. I won't bore you with the evidence that it's there and the reasoning I used to conclude that there's a big potted geranium on my windowsill. It's absolutely OK to say what's true if it happens to be true without pedants snapping at your heels, accusing you of being dogmatic. If I told you that Liverpool FC were the greatest team of all time (which they are ;-)), and refused to listen to the abundant(though not necessarily conclusive) evidence to the contrary, then you could justifiably accuse me of being dogmatic. Part of the reasoning I should have applied to all the available evidence is missing. That's why religious zealots are dogmatic. They are failing to apply the whole (or any) of their skills of reasoning. Go and find yourself a nice rock somewhere in the intertidal zone, why don't you. As for debating, you don't debate. You quote other people and you react. You work on the backs of other posters, so kindly save us from your criticism on that score.