Science and the scientific method is infallible... unfortunately, scientific theories (as history certainly proves) more often than not do not merit such distinctions. Less than a century ago, Newtonian mechanics had a monopoly on the way all physical phenomena was observed to move... this theory, while tenable for most practical engineering purposes, did not hold up to the rigor of modern experimental evidence. Rather, objects moving close to the speed of light clearly violated these accepted laws, and thank God for Einstein, these results were explained by the discovery of relativity.
Now, the scientific method is absolutely infallible (no one would dare to disagree with that--least of all Christian fundamentalists), but if we were to insist that Newton's ways were objectively correct and above refutation, we would NOT have been able to send a man to the moon.
My point is this: cosmically, to believe in the supernatural creation of this world by an Almighty creator is not at all scientifically refuted--still less that Adam was created from the dirt and that Eve was created from one of Adam's ribs considering that most of our bodies are composed of elements similar to those found in various soils. If modern evolution theory wants to paint a different picture than that, and to somehow provide striking evidence to the contrary for something that happened approximately 5,000 years ago--please, I'd love to see it... but as for me? I am much more inclined to believe the Author's account of the origins of the world than man's grave suspicions.
Don't get me wrong... I think evolution should be taught in schools concurrently with creationist theory and that it should be the parents who decide which lessons they wish their children to attend. I don't see what changing the word "evolution" would do for the Christian cause.
Well just a few thoughts... God bless you all.
John 3:16