William said
** While the physical body may have evolved, this is still a theory, not a
** fact. The person, however, is clearly created. Consider the etymology of
** the word "person" and this becomes obvious.

"Theory" means very different things when used in science and when used
colloquially.  A 'theory' in science is the best explanation that fits
the evidence.  The so-called "Theory of Evolution" is one of the strongest
most supported scientific theories, it is no mere hypothesis or 'guess'.
The mountains of evidence for evolution gives it a validation on the order
of 'the earth is round'.

I dont think you should be so dismissive of this important and far reaching
theory.  A good beginning to educating yourself  and finding responses to
those that challenge Evololution Theory I heartily recommend the talk
origins
site:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html

Are you seriously using etyomology as a 'proof' of origins or a disproof of
evolution?

** "Adapting" to foods does not seem reasonable.

Certainly adaptation to enviroment and nutrients have been shown in the
laboratory for bacteria.  E.g. bacteria developed to 'eat' petroleum, the
engineering of yeast for making cheeses, breads and alcohol, etc.  In higher
animals, I think one of the first examples of evolution, Darwin's Finches;
the developement of beaks on the finches in particular for different eating
different foods on the different microenviroments on Galapagos Islands.  I
think it is more than reasonable to suppose that primates (that includes us
humans) have evolved different eating patterns both out of need and
opportunity.  As far as humans are concerned, a very good book called
'Nutrition and Evolution' by Crawford and Marsh details a lot of info
about diet and human evolution.  Highly recommended.


  Wade