What convinced you of Evolution?

I prefer the following analogy:Student A turns in his term paper, which his professor notices is remarkably similar to a term paper turned in by Student B the prior year. In fact, it appears identical to Student B's term paper except for a few opportunistic changes: Student A's name at the top, the current course's recommended texts in the bibliography, and so on. Most curious are the presence of certain typographical errors in Student A's paper which just so happen to be exactly the same errors as occur in Student B's paper.If Student A claims that his paper is a completely independent creation, who would buy that?Creationists want us to believe that what we know about the DNA molecule and reproduction should tell us nothing about the relationships between separate species. They want us to believe that similarities among genomes of many dissimilar species, even identical mutations in the exact same spot in the genome, is just as forceful evidence of independent creation as of common descent.But who's buying that?------------------
The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall

Using Creationist logic, since the vast majority of conceptions are never witnessed, the concept of human sexual reproduction is unsupported by evidence. The DNA evidence is persuasive only if you already subscribe to this unsubstantiated notion. I may as well be the product of an independent act of creation.------------------
The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall

But whose story fits the most data? Just like a bigot will present Willie Horton as proof that all blacks are violent, creationists use a selective amount of factoids to support their position. The vast majority of the available data is simply ignored. Imagination is a wonderful thing, but willful ignorance is not.Evolution is supported by data from a wide range of fields, using verifiable mechanisms and proposing a remarkably consistent timeline. Creationism fails on all these accounts, and depends for its support on just the sort of special pleading (in the guise of 'objectivity') that you seem to advocate.------------------
The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall

Your cold, rational objectivity in the face of factual data would impress us a lot more if you'd demonstrate even a passing familiarity with the facts themselves. The real point of the blind-men-and-the-elephant analogy is that some people can convince themselves that their judgments are objective even though they know they haven't considered all the facts. If you're satisfied with that methodology, it wouldn't surprise anyone here.------------------
The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall