Richard Dawkins is the one who is scientifically unsound. No matter how hard they try the Darwinist will not be able to skew the fossil record to support macro evolution. Evolution is still an unprovable hypothesis and not scientific fact or law.
Barry from Ky. wrote: I'm just curious. Is this a success of the public education system in teaching evolution, or a failure of the Church by not teaching Creation?
Probably both. Honestly, I'm surprised that a third in England believe the world was created, though probably only a portion of those believe the God of the Bible created it. And as Jim Lincoln says, many don't have any idea of who that Designer was.
Frankly, I see little point in pursuing the argument with unbelievers from an Intelligent Design perspective, because it is possible to believe in an Intelligent Designer and still deny the God of the Bible. I have met many in the visible church who refuse to take Genesis 1 and 2 at face value. If one rejects the literal interpretation of those two very plain and easily understood chapters, at what point does the literal interpretation begin?
I don't think you can have it both ways: either God miraculously created the world and everything in it, or he did not. And if he did not, what's the point of pretending to be Christian, for there is no Creator to whom we are accountable, and thus no need for a Redeemer.
As in this country, probably many don't have much more than a clue who that Designer was. [URL=http://www.johnankerberg.org/Articles/_PDFArchives/science/SC3W0699.pdf]]]Some Interesting Statements By Scientists: (only one is by a biblical creationist)[/URL] and [URL=http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=919081222110]]]The Roman Road[/URL].