No, I said "scientifically verifiable information", which excludes youtube postings since there is no way to verify what some potential idiot (or genius) posts there. The entire scientific method, which you denigrate because science seems to keep changing its mind, is aimed at gradually and continually approaching the truth. Youtube postings are outside of the scientific method, and belong in the realm of the Area51 method. Show me some peer-reviewed documentation of what you are claiming and I'll listen (critically, but I'll listen).

Please do show me what literature I have missed in 50 years of studying and doing research in biology and teaching about evolutionary theory. I'm always ready to modify my views (as opposed to some other, unnamed people on this site) when confronted with scientifically verifiable information.

You are correct, the bible does not specifically say that the earth is 6000 (or whatever) years old, but that figure is a bedrock concept for that branch of creationists known as Young Earth Creationists, a branch that clings to biblical inerrancy and literalism that leads to creationism. I just assumed that Rac is a member of this branch due to his strong adherence to its philosophy, but I could be wrong in this assumption.

You don't find many Cambrian species (or even phyla) alive today. That includes plants, which didn't appear until well after the Cambrian. The possible explanations are either that there was another creation event that the bible somehow missed, or that life comes from other life with modifications. Evolutionary theory simply tries to explain the forces that lead to such modifications.

The claim of mis-dated lava comes from a paper published in 1974 in a "scientific journal" entitled "Scientific Creationism", which is unobtainable. As a result it is impossible to examine its premises, procedures, etc.

Where do you get these ideas that there were no transitional forms during the Cambrian dispersion. One example are the lobopods (basically worms with legs) which are intermediate between arthropods and worm, which existed during that time. With a little effort you could find many other examples.

Take a look at "Morris, Henry M., 1974. Scientific Creationism, Green Forest, AR: Master Books, p. 158." The 6 millennial age of the earth has been the bedrock of biblical inerrancy since the 16th century, when Bishop Paley calculated its age from the lifespan information in the bible.

Now lets move on to some of the other claims in that piece you posted.
He says: "Why do books on evolution, including grade school, high school and college textbooks, not include such important, basic information? Evolutionists are masters of speculation; why don’t they speculate about this?" in reference to the origin of elements and chemical compounds. The answer is simple - evolution makes no claims about the origin of chemicals, atoms or the universe in general, so no textbooks, scientific publications or blogs addressing evolution need to discuss this. Incidentally, in my readings of the bible I find no mention of the Calvin cycle, weak hydrogen bonding, or any of the other zillion chemical facts...by your "reasoning", why is that?

He also says: "What are the odds that the evolutionary process, proceeding by random changes, would produce human beings, plus millions of species of animals, birds, fish and insects, all with symmetrical features, i.e., one side being a mirror image of the other? We take symmetry in all these creatures for granted, but is that a reasonable outcome for a random process?" The odds of this happening are 100% since it has happened. And just in the interests of completeness and accuracy, not all life forms are symmetrical - your own body has clearly defined left-right asymmetries, for example. Just ask your renal arteries, your heart and liver.

I could go on, but life is too short, and my bucket list grows daily.

Experience tells me that arguing this point with you is like trying to explain atomic structure to a chicken, but here goes. Whoever "debunked" the status of cetacean femurs is simply wrong. These structures develop in the whale embryo as normal hind limbs, complete with acetabula, synovial joints and all of the requisite attached muscles. They fail to complete their development, and become embedded in blubber and remain subcutaneous in most individuals. There have been several observed instances in which the structures do protrude from the body a bit, but in almost all cetaceans they remain firmly under the skin, and are of no functional consequence at all - not in reproduction, not in walking, not in swimming...nothing. Vestigal! If you want to see another example of a transitional form look in the mirror. Every species is transitional (or doomed to extinction) in some way. You have an appendix, but I don't since it was removed when I was 15 years old, to no long lasting consequences. Vestigal! Your (and my) coccyx, remnant of our tailed ancestors, remains for the time being. Vestigal!

Pathetic, simply pathetic. This list of questions reflects the scientific knowledge I would expect from a 6th grader, and perhaps not a very bright one at that. Go study some inorganic and organic chemistry, physics and mathematics and you will see why those questions make no sense. Then study some biology above 2nd grade level and you will see why the entire paragraph "Fossils disprove evolution" is nonsense, full of incorrect statements (I won't call them lies, since there is a possibility that the writer is actually that stupid and uninformed, and not deliberately lying).

Actually, Snopes has been online for far longer than that. The main complaint is that they don't apply confirmation bias to anything. I have used them for many years as part of my course in information literacy, and have found them to hoist all sides of the political spectrum onto a petard when needed. Oh...by the way, "obama's" should be "Obama,s", but I'll put that down to a typo, not a deliberate sign of disrespect to the individual who won presidential election twice.

Did you bother to look at actual photographs of the ring - it clearly has no foreign writing on it - it is just decorated with common scrolling. The left/right bias of any site is irrelevant when you let your eyes do the looking. Unless, of course, you are blinded by ideology.

Please see http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp for the facts. Although some commenters in this thread are not deterred by facts, it is good for the rest of us to be aware of the foolishness that is taken as gospel by some.

This just touches one of my sensitive spots. Far too many college seniors in my classes don't know how to evaluate internet-derived sources. Their general attitude is that if I see it on the internet, and it agrees with me, it must be right. If it is about science then it doesn't have to agree with me since I don't know any science to be agreed with, but it is still right.

The Judicial Watch report quotes an anonymous source - in other words, Martians have declared that Ebola victims are to be admitted to the US according to other unnamed sources. Before we get our panties all in a bunch let's wait until something is known from a reliable (and identified) source.