How about addressing the argument, stu. It is easy to acuse and abuse, but not so easy to frame a convincing argument . My argument is quite simple.....show me an interpretation of the data that can only be accounted for according to your belief. I have previously shown data that don't fit evolutionism, but of corse, you can always fall back on the ...science is a process....line!   In other words a faith position ! Ie you believe that accepted at one time science can be put on hold till something turns up to validate your devotion to evolutionism !.          Bill,, I also keep telling you, that when you believe something for which there is not conclusive evidence ,that is IMO, a faith position. I reckon circular reasoning goes both ways. You assume it is true, and so you look to the authorities that confirm your belief. The fact is, people, even many scientists believe stuff that they do not have any evidence of.....only interpretation of data.                            Shimrod... Hypothesis based on an analogy?   Well, no one could accuse you of that....you got a hypothesis based on fanciful ideas. What kind of analogy can you use for an everything from nothing via no one belief.....and you call that science ! Again, it is your faith position, and I doubt you can even find an analogy to use.   You say you are ..inclined to accept the authority if scientists....,as long as it is the ones that agree with you eh!    Apart from the fact that there are a lot of scientists that don't buy it, it is an invalid argument anyway. most scientists at one time were geocentric....and wrong !.   So go on, prove me wrong, show me some evolution?!.