Well, this is certainly getting interesting!
"probably from the same cloud of space dust that coalesced (probably because of gravity) to form our sun (And the billions of other suns in our galaxy alone)"
All you've done is move the problem back a step. You have yet to explain where the cloud of space dust, as you put it, came from. The idea of spontaneous generation has been disproved long ago - you simply cannot get something from nothing. Until you resolve the problem of where all the materials came from, you have no right to discuss how they 'evolved.'
As to your remark about gravity - if there ever was such a thing as the big bang, all the elements of the universe would have been expanding outward from its initial point. What makes you think that all that material could defy inertia and coalesce together?
Matter should be equally distributed throughout the universe if your scenario were true, yet it is not. Further, if our entire solar system came from the same spinning gas cloud which somehow formed around our star, why is there retrograde motion in the some of the planets and moons?
"Again, there's no 'design' or 'perfection'"
1) The human body
2) The earth
a.) Moon and its affect on tides
b.) Distance from the sun
c.) Tilt of the earth
3) The hydrological cycle
4) Weather
5) Gravity
Really, the list goes on and on. We often take for granted this design because it seems so natural. Even evolutionists are forced to speak of the 'illusion of design". For you to insist that even the appearance of design is non-existent is little more than denial.
Evolution IS fact.... full stop. We observe it happening all the time.
Even if the idea of evolution had been present from day one of recorded history and man had been carefully observing nature to discern this process, we would still not have been studying evolution for a fraction of the time which this process supposedly takes. Evolution has never been observed - there are no examples of evolution in the modern world or in the history of the earth.
The only thing which has been witnessed is adaptation (whether in life or through the fossil record) - that is, variation within a species. This is totally consistent with the biblical conception of all animals and mankind as having been created as separate and distinct kinds.
Adaptation, or micro-evolution, as it is sometimes called, does not equal macro-evolution. A bird with a slightly modified beak, or a fruit-fly with an extra set of wings has nothing to do with a monkey becoming a man.
"Not science, but the scientific METHOD...."
Might I recommend The Limitations of Scientific Truth by Nigel Brush. I believe you would find this book informative.
"Science never claimed to be infallible in the least.... The difference is, unlike 'theology' science LEARNS from it's mistakes"
You're correct, science didn't claim to be infallible - you claimed it to be infallible by your loyalty to a discipline, which by your own admission is constantly growing. The very things you are now defending may not be scientifically viable 50 or 100 years from now.
Regarding theology - if it's not broken, then there's no need to fix it. Constant change isn't necessarily a good thing.
"'I am not qualified to discuss the subject in any depth', is the only thing you've said so far that has any validity."
As you and I both know, that commet was made concerning the specific topic of carbon14 dating, and I stand by it. However, you chose to move this discussion into the much broader realm of theism vs. atheism, and on this subject I am more than prepared to hold my own.
"You could change that by getting yourself a decent education..... But you'd have to leave the flock and stop pecking at the sidewalk."
Ad hominem arguments are the oldest trick in the book, and I won't be taking the bait. Tempting though...
All statements made in this discussion are my own opinions which I have formed, and continue to form through careful study, analysis and research. There's no need to pretend that someone is feeding me this information - rather, it is my firm belief, and one which is grounded in truth.