All I can say is . . . I am no longer surprised by the replies pertaining to evolution. Bodhi asks a very simple question; "What makes Creationism believable?"
The answer; "The meticulousness and precision of design . . .."
Now, for the average reader, this answer would imply that the person answering believes in Creationism. Yet the very last sentence used in the reply is, "I'm agnostic, which means: I DON'T KNOW."
Perhaps I am the one confused here . . . but I do not think so, because sKiTzo also believes in evolution, but only to a certain extent.
So; evolution exists, but not as grand as the science says. God may or may not exist . . . but for sure, he, she, or the aliens created life, as proven by a process of elimination (screw science). Which means we eliminate all the repetitive observations & tests that lead to the generally accepted Theory of Evolution . . . it may as well be gravity . . . we all know that hasn't been proven either.
Fossil record? It means nothing. Dating methods and rates of decay? Means nothing. Geology? Nothing. Molecular genetics and biology? Meaningless. Mitochondrial DNA, bottleneck, observation and testing are nothing when compared to "The only evidence of evolution we've seen . . .." And this coming from someone who isn't sure God exists, but we have souls, and creationism is more believable than science. Once again, is it I who is confused or you? I'm sorry, but if your reply was a person, it would be a walking contradiction.