The good thing is, nothing needs to replace these silly ideas, because the ideas don't actually advance Science in any way. "Dinosaurs evolved into birds" doesn't have to be replaced with anything, no more than having a mole removed from your back needs to
be replaced with something to take its place - it's simply unnecessary, and a waste of valuable time.
In a world where cancer is killing children, and families are starving every night, why should we waste time and money trying to investigate pointless issues like which theropod is the best candidate for bird-evolution? It's simply not necessary, and doesn't
need to be replaced with anything.
Let's focus our Scientific knowledge and tax-payer dollars on researching things that will actually benefit the world.
i will have to disagree with you ...the core understanding of science is that complex entities are made up of simpler entities ..and these entities interact in a interest way and in the process, form new entities or retain their identity but change in properties
..at its core, science is all about understanding our natural world and knowing how, why, when simple and complex entities where formed is a critical component of science ..
complex scientific thinking is build on simpler scientific thinking that are inturn build on more simpler scientific thinking ...you cant just dismiss something at a basic level without replacing it and expect the higher level stuff to continue being sound
thats like saying "who cares about quantum mechanics"? when there are children dying of hunger? or whatever that hydrojen collider will show? ...all things in our natural world are interconnected on a fundamental level ..you will have to have something like
"GOD did it" in areas we dont know and dont care to investigate because "who cares?"well, "GOD did it because HE just wanted to" isnt very logical thing to say
"theropod is the best candidate for bird-evolution" and "Dinosaurs evolved into birds" are relevant question if you want to draw "a family of living organism tree and its history" .. a clue to cure to cancer could lie somewhere on that tree ..science doesnt
like gaps ...it will always come with an explanation to close it ..you can just remove an explanation without offering a replacement ..even less that complete and troublesome explanations are sometimes used to fill up gaps ..
do you have any links i can read more about the 98% in evolution that is in Creationist paradism? or any attempt and merging/showing similarities creationism and evolution/naturalism?
how do you define a cretionist?
what do you think about intelliget design?
what do you think about teaching intelligent design in public schools?
i am just c