Quote:

Through accumulation of advantageous mutations. Random DNA modifications and insertion of foreign DNA sequences are both mutations.



Cool, I've already shown that random mutations don't increase complexity (all modern examples do the opposite). This still begs the question. WHAT WROTE THE DNA IN THE FOREIGN SOURCE? If we don't know where it came from, then we can't attribute it to an evolutionary change. Its more like sharing....But either way, while the bacteria may be getting something new, you have to explain how random changes in DNA can write this data in the first place. Eventually, if we put all the known bacteria in a test tube and let them share plasmids (etc), we would eventually reach equillibrium, and if you believe this is evolution, then evolution ends with all of the 'germs' being the same germs they were before. Hardly sounds like evolution to me.

Quote:

The short periodic comets that are allegedly a contradiction originate in the Kuiper and Asteroid belts.



I fail to see how Kuiper explains away the problem. Maybe you can elaborate?

Quote:

Science is motivated by the search for truth, while creationism is motivated by propagating literal bible belief.



That's an unfair stereotype if I've ever heard one. That would be like me asserting that evolutionists are simply motivated by propagating atheist views. Oh, wait....

Quote:

creationism you begin with a fixed "theory" and then need to interpret the observations until they fit the theory.



You've gotta be kidding me?! This is what everyone is doing nowadays. This is what science has become. How are we considered the only ones doing this? If at all.

Quote:

science it's vice versa, you begin with observations and then develop a theory that fits the observations.



This is funny

"The task force finds that...the unborn child is a whole human being from the moment of fertilization, that all abortions terminate the life of a human being, and that the unborn child is a separate human patient under the care of modern medicine."