Creationism Vs Evolution

ZOMG RANT ALERT

It sickens me how many people in this country don't believe in evolution.  I heard a statistic that it's around half, but I doubt it's that many.  Science is about rational thought and testable ideas and experiments.  Rejecting the scientific theory of the origin of the human race is like not believing in friction, saying something like that it's god's will that things don't move infinitley.  Even though most fundamental scientific principles are proved indirectly at first (like the spherical nature of the earth), when we are able to directly observe it, we are right because it has been tested indirectly so much.  Religious extremists dismiss evidence like fossils as "tricks by god to test our faith" or something like that.  I bet if someone took a born again christian or another religious extremist in a time machine back 65 million years ago, observed dinosaurs, and returned, they would still reject their direct observations as "hethanistic trickery" or something like that.  Courts have ruled in some places that scientific arguments in favor of creationism can be taught in public schools, what will they have to show?  This intelligent design theory they yammer about is nothing more than pseudoscience, and a lazy underestimation of the power and magnitude biodiversity, natural selection, and time can accomplish.

Man is this long. But, if you want to go back to the consciousness deal... there is no real reason to believe consciousness exists outside of the body any more than the Platonic 'ideals'. Consciousness, as far as science can see, is merely a feedback loop between sense and environment. In the end, the human mind is no different than a carbon-based computer, eager for data and able to transfer files to its copies; even though upload time can take awhile.

On creationism v. evolution, the main subject of the thread (and totally unrelated as far as I can see to consciousness), there are many problems. First, creationism and evolution CAN coexist; Pope John Paul II had reconciled the origin of the species with church doctrine, saying that God injected the soul upon the fusing of two ape chromosomes into (iirc) chromosome 2. Evolution deals with how life changes over time; creationism deals with how life came about. It is consistent to say that God created life and left it, like a clockmaker, to work with the springs and cogs of evolution. Now, as to the veracity of creationism itself, there is no logical dispute. Abiogenesis theory is still in the early stages, but there is no doubt that the presence of an 'intelligent designer' is not necessary. Besides, even if we did find out "Hey, amino acids were created by lightning in Earth's early atmosphere," would it matter? Natural phenomena have always been attributed to gods and goddesses, whether it be a volcano or water condensing on a window in the shape of the Virgin Mary. You can always take the magic out and  still have a creator; he just used a saw and hammer (i.e. evolution, lighting) instead of a wand. Nonetheless, when you find all the basic reasons for everything, is it necessary to add in the deity? Then you get into intrinsic value of religion, after the empirical truth has been eliminated.