As a scientist and parent, the most profound takeaway that is most likely to ruffle the most feathers:
    * We can only know what we have observed and kept track of
        (and even that is subject to our interpretations and limitations on observation)

We have between 50 and a few hundred years of documented scientific observation, depending on the area of focus. We have belief that the world environment has never changed, and many assumptions about things we have not tested and verified (or cannot). As a scientist, I don't care whether you believe in creation or some other explanation. But let's not ruin science by misclassifying theories as law. We cannot expect the next generation to think critically if we refuse to teach them attention to detail and proper coefficients of faith in sources of information. At the end of the debate, we all place faith in something.

Computer science has suffered from something we find largely in the general scientific world: avoiding the discussion by calling the opponent "stupid" in whatever terms and language chosen.

RH -> Caldera OpenLinux -> SCO UL -> OpenSuSE -> Ubuntu -> Kubuntu.
There was a brief stint with Mandrake in the middle, but *very* brief.
I need to get work done. Linux/KDE is great for me to get work done. Ubuntu makes it easy, if not perfect :)

what about the bones? the ones that we believe are millions of years old even though the only data we've been able to analyze has been from the last 200 years or less? yeah, i'm skeptical. what about "other ages"? why do we believe that the things we study have always been as we've seen them recently? why do we believe that the earth's atmosphere has always been as it is, and not more like mars... or more different than mars? it is because children accept the things they learn when they are young that we teach them as we believe. this occurs in atheist and Christian, Muslim and Jewish households the world over.

i'm particularly amused about this "engineers" comment.
i make quite a decent living as an engineer. i still believe in a created world, and a God at work behind it all.

bill has apparently bought into the idea that "the american scientific community is the source of all truth". sadly, he leaves little room for people who are skeptical about scientific rules and publications that seem to have more anti-God than actual science. i'm ok with hypothesizing and theorizing. however, the scientific community benefits if we call a theory a theory.

we don't need to simply accept evolution hook line and sinker to create amazing things. nor to understand how things work right now.

i simply fail to see how the wholesale swallowing of something as ill-proven and flimsy as evolution does us a whole lot of good today? it doesn't push forward science. it doesn't find the higgs-boson, nor does it enhance quantum-theory. it simply provides something to believe about the origins of the universe if you choose not to believe in a God-created world. the humor here is that evolutionists used to be the skeptics, in a largely God-believing world (however ill-informed). now, we believers are skeptical; we see the leaps of faith required to believe evolution... and the student once again becomes the master. we now get to be the skeptics.

sorry, bill. i'm not buying it. prove it, or accept that it is a theory.

and now for my awkward quote of the day:
John 20:29 - Jesus said to him, "“Because you have seen me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen, and have believed.”"

And nine...nine rings were gifted to the race of Men...who above all else, desire power.