Despite the claims of many in the "God did it" camp, evolutionary science is not a religion. It is not based on faith, but on observation, extrapolation and reasoning. Unfortunately, however, the Creation lobby have struck upon a tactic that makes their position unassailable: they simply reverse the actual situation, pretend that scientists are some sort of white-clad priesthood driven by faith and zeal, and portray their own position as the rational one supported by the facts.

I say this makes their position unassailable, and so it does. Those who have dealings with small children will know that, at some point in a child's young life, it will suddenly come up with this brilliant idea of echoing everything that is said to it. It is impossible to persuade the child to stop, however irritating the behaviour may be, because any attempt to reason with the child will be met with simple repetition. The child's behaviour is completely irrational - but any rational argument is doomed to fail. The only way through this annoyance is to be silent until the child gets bored. Similar is the behaviour whereby the child asks a question, which the adult, thinking it genuine, answers, only to be asked, "why?" An attempt to explain further is met with another, "why?" And again. And again. There usually follows a frustrating scene in which the adult initially tries to answer the child's persistent demands for more and more detail, before realising that the child has no interest in the answers being given, and is simply playing - trying to see how long it can continue to annoy the adult by repeating the word "why". Again, no argument is possible. The child cannot be reasoned out of this, and must simply be left alone until it gets fed up and decides to do something else.

What is the relevance of this? Well, both behaviours have their parallels here. The repetitive "why" is precisely the same tactic that is used by Creationists in their demands for "proof". As with the child in the example above, it is not possible for those who understand science, or evolution, or whatever, to explain to the Creationist's satisfaction. Because the Creationist is not really interested in answers - he or she is interested only in asking - demanding - "proof". Of course, no proof offered will ever be accepted as such, and any answer will be met only with another demand for "proof" - another "why".

Similarly, the constant repetition of the child has its parallel in the Creationists' accusations against science. Quite aside from the internal inconsistency of decrying science as religious nonsense and then claiming that one's own religious belief is scientific, it serves the Creationist well to simply hit back any claim made against them. Tell them they are driven by faith and not by fact - "no, YOU are". Tell them their arguments do not make sense - "no, YOURS don't". And so on. It is akin to the schoolyard "takes one to know one", or the American "I am rubber, you are glue". Yet, because religion is involved, tactics that would be laughed at and mocked in school are given credence in the adult world.

In short, as I said previously, the argument against Creationism is utterly futile. Like the irritating child amusing itself in the ways described above, the Creationism lobby is not receptive to new information, nor responsive to any argument made against it. It does not listen; it does not learn. The only way to deal with Creationism is to wait until its advocates grow up. Until then, as I said, all we can do is try to ensure that they are not able to indoctrinate TOO many of the new generations into their own wilful ignorance.