It was a bit of a sudo debate, where they where trying to get laughs more than anything. I don't feel either one won the debate, people already had their minds made up before they arrived. Its hard to determine who was a winner though because they both had genuine points intertwined with lightharted humor. Jon Stewart was funnier but Bill was not bad considering it's not his trade. What I think they showed though was that they had more in common than a lot of people give them credit for. Now when Bill O'Rielly is on the Daily Show he gets a cheer from the audience. I have a lot more time for O'Rielly because of the Daily Show.

The intresting point they both got across was "If the news doesn't agree with your point of view you can keep changing channel untill you find one that does"

Someone tweetted it was one of the ten most important political debates on that evening.

creation ;-)

As long as that's the theme though. If it was a diffrent subject and I agreed with them then I would support them.

I come here to argue with creationist, 'cos sometimes there just nothing funny on TV.

I'm not sure about this article, It's a little to vague and senationlists.

I think the words "mothers and fathers" as in the mother and father of the child will be replaced with "parents" as in parents of the child.

I don't understand how this relates to gay marriage.

I will reserve judgement untill I hear from more sources than Le Croix.

Physical Evidence

Evidence

Evidence,

Even if other facts where discovered it would simply be a modification of the theory.

No other theory fits the facts, it is beyond resonable doubt.

If that's good enoiugh for the Judiciary system, it's good enough for me.

Please, Please check the definition of what "scientists" means when they say THEORY, it is not the same as conjecture.