I have been presented with more evidence than I would care to talk about that Evolution is a hoax, a fraud, and the 'evidence' that has been presented for it has been time and time again been disproven by scientists in the field, ones that weren't being sponsored by people interested in them finding evidence that proves evolution.
No, you have not, and no such thing has occurred. Feel free to start a thread claiming such, but you have been presented with no evidence against evolution whatsoever. At best, someone lied to you. At worst, you paid someone for the privilege.
You're actually calling a large number of members of this forum - who have seen and done such research with our own eyes, frauds. And for what end? So more people can suffer and die each year?
These people work long hours, doing thankless tasks, for little net benefit to themselves, but provide you with serious tangible benefits, and for what? So you can spit in their face and call them frauds, repeating the lies of actual, convicted frauds such as Kent Hovind?
At some level, it reminds me of arguing with someone who claimed that quantum mechanics was bunk, over the Internet. It's not as patently hilarious to anyone who has a concept of how electronic transistors work, but at the same time, it's more insidious and horrifying. The damage Creationists do has a cost in human suffering and lives. I don't blame you for buying into it, but please take a step back and understand that scientists are not faceless inhuman entities.
They are people. Some of whom are here.
And they do work. Some of which has or may improve your life.
And you may never get a chance to thank them in person. They don't exactly work for pay.
However, as this isn't a Creationist vs. Evolutionist thread, and I would be more than happy to discuss this, in a manner in which religion is not involved (because, well, I am thinking that there is as little chance that you will be convinced that the Universe was created in six days as there is a chance of me believing in the Big Bang)... However, the point remaining is that I have seen, in current Textbooks, facts that have been very firmly disproved by the scientific world 50 years ago, and I don't like that my tax payer's dollars are going to spreading stuff like that. That being said, I agree firmly with you, and if you are paying towards the upkeep of something that you normally would have no business even looking at, then you have every right in the world to get the government on the case of said object, to, if not get rid of it, then at least make sure that you don't have to pay for it.
Usually this is stuff like where a given bone goes, or other data points. This is more an impact of the underfunding of educational programs, and the ridiculous lockdown that textbook publishers have on that market.
But again, feel free to start a thread if you take issue with a specific point.
I personally have no idea what you are talking about an expression of entropy, so that means that I am probably wrong, and you are right... however, looking over the everything, showing that everything has balance until man comes around and disrupts it, I find it rather hard to believe that all of this came together by chance, which was my point to begin with. I am not saying that you believe that, I am just saying that I do not.
I can't really address the latter. It's certainly unnecessary to invent a micromanaging God for the Universe, though.
Entropy is 'heat' after a fashion - not heat in the sense of something being hot versus cold, but rather in the sense of being energy that is so evenly dissipated that it cannot be harnessed. Thus when we speak of 'the heat death of the Universe', it's actually very cold. But it's cold everywhere. The stars have long since ceased to shine, and nothing remains but a cold, dead void, for all time.
A simple way to think of it is to take a pool, place a film separating it into two halves, and fill one side with dye. Here you have your highly ordered, original Universe. Remove the film (the 'Big Bang'), and all chaos breaks loose as the dye spreads to the entirety of the pool, creating many very artistic turbulent wisps as it does so.
You are one such wisp. Were you to somehow reverse the process, your order of perception, too, would reverse.
I hope that helps. : /
But I agree with Vodka. The Arguing over these subjects brings out the worst in any kind of person, including myself(I recall very vividly having made a complete fool of myself not too long ago), and, while discussing these subjects over dinner, with a nice something to drink, is great! But actually forcing what you do and do not believe down someone's throat is bad business for all involved, and I apologize if I have ever seemed like doing this. However, scientific rights and wrongs are not beliefs, and I more than welcome being called a complete idiot if I have it all wrong.
I wouldn't call it forcing a belief so much as being actively antagonistic. It convinces no one.