Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

I don't know where you're getting the idea that single cells could not begin the process of evolution...but as for the chance of the beginning of life on a planet, take some more pages from this site (again) into account:

You know, bolding random words doesn't lend any weight to your argument. In fact, quite the opposite.

You can't just say something like that without any proof. Back it up.

I don't know where you're getting the idea that single cells could not begin the process of evolution...

All the evidence I need is the BIBLE.

BTW: I don't go around killing people for the wrongs I feel they commited. I leave that to God.

All the evidence I need is the BIBLE.
That's just me. I can't not be myself! You'd understand if you sat through the kinds of Church services I do. You would understand me. It's fine with me if you don't. I was just trying to make my point with the resources I have. I'm sorry.

BTW: I don't go around killing people for the wrongs I feel they commited. I leave that to God.

Why should you expect him to prove what he says, when you didn't offer much proof for your statement about the probability of the existence of a supreme being? Double Standard anyone?

I mean like... take gravity for example. We know how it works, but do we know why it happens? And if you can explain it into more detail than that, then do you know why THAT happens too? Eventually you have to say 'just because it happens'.

Wittness by acts, kindness, and patience Westar.
Personaly, as long as evolution is labled as a theory in our textbooks, and we teach that there are other veiws I'm okay. Hopefully, people will see that way that evolution is not true.

I'm not trying to be offensive, BUT WHATS WRONG IS WRONG!

And if we get far enough into it that we can prove God is the cause of life, where did God come from? All answers create more questions, even "God".

If the chance of life is so low, then the chance of all powerful, superntural life, more complex than we can imagine, must be even lower.

So true so true! THATS WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY! G-O-D! NOT CHANCE!

Personaly, as long as evolution is labled as a theory in our textbooks, and we teach that there are other veiws I'm okay. Hopefully, people will see that way that evolution is not true.

I back up wesstar all the way. Evolution should not be taught in shcoolsif its wrong it shouldnt be taught. There is no reason for nosense from scientists to be taught to the people of america.

P.S. I'm not trying to be offensive, BUT WHATS WRONG IS WRONG!

I've been wondering, if you DO teach some sort of creationism, what do you teach and how do you teach it? It may come as a shock to some, but Christians are not the only people who believe in some sort of creation or intelligent design. All of those who believe in creation have different ideas about just how things happened. How do you teach it in such a way that you cover the bases, without taking 2 or 3 years?

In fairness, creation and evolution deserve equal time in science classes.
Source:
Morris, Henry M. 1985. Scientific Creationism. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 197-198.

Response:

1. The teaching of creationism does not belong in science classes because creationism has no science to teach. It is based on personal religious belief, not on evidence. For the most part, creationism can fit with anything we find, making it unscientific. Where creation models do make specific predictions that can be tested against evidence, they fail the tests. Asking for equal time is asking for nonscience to be taught in science classes.

A 1999 United States poll found that most people favor teaching evolution -- and teaching it as science -- and that when creationism is taught, most prefer that it be taught either in nonscience classes or as a religious belief (DYG 2000).

2. Equal time would open creationism, and by extension Christianity in general, to ridicule and attack. Saint Augustine recognized this in the fifth century:

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, . . . and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking non-sense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. (Augustine 1982, 42-43)

3. Equal time would mean teaching

* other versions of creationism from other denominations of Christianity (including young-earth, old-earth, day-age, gap theory, geocentrism, and flat earth). All have equal basis for being taught, since they are all based on exactly the same Bible. All are mutually incompatible (DYG 2000; Watchtower 1985, 186; Morris 1984, 215-247).

* other versions of scientific creationism from other religions. Claims have been made for Muslim, Hindu, and Native American versions of creationism.

The only legal precedent favoring creationism in the United States in the last fifty years was an Interior Department decision finding, on the basis of native creation and flood myths, that 9400-year-old Kennewick Man was associated with present-day Native American tribes (Chatters 2001, 266).

* creation traditions from other religions and cultures, including, but not limited to, the Aaragon, Abenaki, Acoma, Ainu, Aleut, Amunge, Angevin, Anishinabek, Anvik-Shageluk, Apache, Arapaho, Ararapivka, Arikara, Armenian, Arrernte, Ashkenazim, Assiniboine, Athabascan, Athena, Aztec, Babylonian, Balinese, Bannock, Bantu, Basque, Blackfoot, Blood, Bosnian, Breton, Brul, Bundjalung, Burns Paiute, Caddo, Cahuilla, Catalan, Cayuga, Cayuse, Celt, Chehalis, Chelan, Cherokee, Chewella, Cheyenne, Chickasaw, Chinook, Chippewa, Chirachaua, Choctaw, Chukchi, Coeur d'Alene, Columbia River, Colville, Comanche, Congolese, Concow, Coquille, Cow Creek, Cowlitz, Cree, Creek, Croat, Crow, Crow Creek, Cumbres, Curonian, crap, Cut Head, Da'an, Devon, Dihai-Kutchin, Diyari, Dogon, Duwamish, Egyptian, Elwha, Eritrean, Eskimo, Esrolvuli, Eta, Even, Evenk, Flathead, Fijian, Fox, Fuegan, Gaul, Gooniyandi, Gond, Govi Basin Mongolian, Grand Ronde, Gros Ventre, Haida, Han, Haranding, Havasupai, Hendriki, Heortling, Hidatsa, Hindi, Hmong, HoChunk, Hoh, Hoopa, Hopi, Hunkpapa, Hutu, Ik-kil-lin, Inca, Innu, Intsi Dindjich, Inuit, Iroquois, Isleta, Itchali, Itelemen, It-ka-lya-ruin, Itkpe'lit, Itku'dlin, Jicarilla Apache, Jotvingian, Kaiyuhkhotana, Kalapuya, Kalispel, Kamchandal, Kansa, Karuk, Katshikotin, Kaurna, Kaw, Kazahk, Ketschetnaer, Khanti, Khoi-San, Khymer, Kickapoo, Kiowa, Kirghiz, Kitchin-Kutchin, Klamath, Knaiakhotana, K'nyaw, Koch-Rajbongshi, Kolshina, Kono, Kootenai, Koyukukhotana, !Kung, Kurd, La Jolla, Lac Courte D'Oreille, Lac Du Flambeau, Laguna, Lake, Lakota, Lao, Latgalian, Leech Lake Chippewa, Lemmi, Lower Brul, Lower Yanktonai, Lowland Lummi, Lummi, Malawi, Makah, Mandan, Maori, Maricopan, Martinez, Mayan, Mazatec, Mednofski, Menominee, Meryam Mir, Mesa Grande, Mescalero Apache, Metlakatla, Miniconjou, Mission, Moallalla, Modoc, Mohawk, Mojave, Morongo, Muckleshoot, Murrinh-Patha, Nadruvian, Nagorno-Karabakh, Na-Kotchpo-tschig-Kouttchin, Nambe, Namib, Natche'-Kutehin, Navajo, Nes Pelem, Neyetse-kutchi, Nez Perce, Ngiyampaa, Nisqualli, Nnatsit-Kutchin, Nomelackie, Nooksack, Norman, Norse, Northern Cheyenne, Nyungar, Oglala, Ogorvalte, Ojibway, Okanagon, Okinawan, Olmec, Omaha, Oneida, Onondaga, Ordovices, Orlanthi, Osage, Osetto, O-til'-tin, Otoe, Paakantyi, Paiute, Pala Mission, Papago, Pawnee, Pazyryk, Pechango, Penan, Piegan, Pima, Pitt River, Ponca, Potowatomie, Prussian, Pueblo, Puyallup, Qiang, Quileute, Quinault, Red Cliff Chippewa, Red Lake Chippewa, Redwood, Rincon, Sac, Saisiyat, Sakuddeis, Salish, Salt River, Samish, Samoan, Samogitian, San Carlos Apache, San Idlefonso, San Juan, San Poil, Santa Clara, Sartar, Sauk-Suiattle, Selonian, Semigolian, Seminole, Senecan, Sephardim, Serano, Serb, Shasta, Shawnee, Shiite, Shinnecock, Shoalwater Bay, Shoshone, Sikh, Siletz, Silures, Sinhalese, Sioux, Siskiyou, Sisseton, Siuslaw, Skalvian, S'Klallam, Skokomish, Skyomish, Slovene, Snohomish, Snoqualmie, Soboba, Southern Cheyenne, Spokane, Squaxin Island, Steilacoom, Stillaquamish, Stockbridge, Sunni, Suquamish, Swinomish, Tadjik, Takhayuna, Tala, Talastari, Tamil, Tanaina, Taos, Tarim, Tasman, Tatar, Tesuque, Tlingit, Toltec, Tpe-ttckie-dhidie-Kouttchin, Tranjik-Kutchin, Truk, Tukkutih-Kutchin, Tulalip, Tungus, Turtle Mountain, Tuscarora, Turk, Turkmen, Tutsi, Ugalakmiut, Uintah, Umatilla, Umpqua, Uncompagre, U-nung'un, Upper Skagit, Ute, Uzbek, Vietnamese, Viking, Vunta-Kutchin, Wahpeton, Walla Walla, Wasco, Wembawemba, White Mountain Apache, Wichita, Wik-ungkan, Winnebago, Wiradjuri, Wylackie, Xhosa, Yahi, Yakama, Yakima, Yakut, Yanamamo, Yankton Sioux, Yellowknife, Yindjibarnd, Youkon Louchioux, Yukaghir, Yukonikhotana, Yullit, Yuma, Zjen-ta-Kouttchin, and Zulu. (from Leipzig, n.d.)

* other ideas for the origin of life and the universe, such as
o solipsism
o Last Thursdayism, the unfalsifiable view that the universe and everything in it was created last Thursday with only the appearance of earlier history
o multiple designers (Hoppe 2004)
o Raelianism or other extraterrestrial involvement
o creation by time travellers.

Creationists do not want all of these taught in science class any more than science educators do. Clearly, creationism in school is an attempt to get greater time than all the opposing views, not equal time. That is not fair.

4. Creationists do not advocate equal time for evolutionary theory in church services. Why?

* other ideas for the origin of life and the universe, such as
o solipsism
o Last Thursdayism, the unfalsifiable view that the universe and everything in it was created last Thursday with only the appearance of earlier history
o multiple designers (Hoppe 2004)
o Raelianism or other extraterrestrial involvement
o creation by time travellers.

Creationists do not want all of these taught in science class any more than science educators do. Clearly, creationism in school is an attempt to get greater time than all the opposing views, not equal time. That is not fair.

4. Creationists do not advocate equal time for evolutionary theory in church services. Why?

The current practice gives all time to one single view, ignoring the opposing views. That's not fair, either.

God doesn't kill for wrongs... Everyone dies. It's part of life. The wrongdoers do fare worse than the others after that, though..
OK... I went off topic there. So, umm, I'm-a gonna toastpaint...

I've been wondering, if you DO teach some sort of creationism, what do you teach and how do you teach it? It may come as a shock to some, but Christians are not the only people who believe in some sort of creation or intelligent design. All of those who believe in creation have different ideas about just how things happened. How do you teach it in such a way that you cover the bases, without taking 2 or 3 years?

The universe and all in it were created by some sort of intelligent being(s).

And about that... you basicly go over everything that is common within all of the religions.

You know, bolding random words doesn't lend any weight to your argument. In fact, quite the opposite.

BTW: I don't go around killing people for the wrongs I feel they commited. I leave that to God.

P.S. I'm not trying to be offensive, BUT WHATS WRONG IS WRONG!

Not if we assume God is infinite... If we assume he is infinite, it is all right to say he just exists because he created even the idea of existance.

Because Church services are Church services are focused towards one thing. Church. That's like saying that geography classes don't give equal time to literature..

Santa Zeno is absolutely right. It makes your posts look extremely immature and makes me inclined to ignore them



I think you're (still) missing the point. Nobody's saying you'd go around killing people, the whole point about the terrorist analogies is how strong your feelings are has no bearing whatever on the truth. If you can't back up your feelings, then it's rather pointless to mention them here. I know this will sound a little harsh, but this isn't a forum for arguing about feelings. "Feelings" are not a valid debate point. You can't say "God must exist because I feel it" and expect this to be taken as a valid point, because, as we have pointed out repeatedly, lots of different people feel lots of different things just as strongly. What makes your feelings special (other than, of course, that they're yours)?


- Kef

I am going to propose a question to all of the people who doubt Evolution. Now in this question I am going to ask you to put your religious beliefs aside and answer this logically.

Which idea sounds better?

1. World created in 6 days, everything is as it was since the beginning of time.

-or-

2. A slow, gradual development, changing on the basis of survival of the fittest, those who can not cut it are phased out. This change spans 4.5 Billion years and will continue until life ceases on this planet.

#1 Just cause I like so called "farfetched" ideas like that to begin with.

Do you know what my biggest beef with Darwinists/ Evolutionists is? They've never went to church a day in their life!

Those aren't just my feelings they're also shared by my family, some of my friends, and millions of others people throughout time.
You seem like a good guy. Logic, not fact has got you caught up in a bad, bad dillema.

I have such a weird way of doing things (your words, not mine) because I am Catholic. As stated earlier, a belief in Catholicism and evolution are not mutually exclusive.

Here's something that might boggle your mind, and this is what I believe: God created evolution as His way of creating life here and possibly elsewhere. The Bible was written the way it was because the people who it was originally written for would not have understood the real way life began.

So? Just because milliosn of people feel soemthing is right doesn't make it right. Feeling does not make fact. It doesn't make anything. You have to put your feelins aside and consider the fact that you might be wrong.

Furthermore, just because he doesn't have the same views as you, he's in a dilema? That... that really ticks me off. (I'll keep my anger controlled, though)

Do you know what my biggest beef with Darwinists/ Evolutionists is? They've never went to church a day in their life! While I've read countless internet arcticles and watched countless History/ Discovery Channel documentaries about their beliefs! They don't give us fair ground.

I have such a weird way of doing things (your words, not mine) because I am Catholic. As stated earlier, a belief in Catholicism and evolution are not mutually exclusive.

Here's something that might boggle your mind, and this is what I believe: God created evolution as His way of creating life here and possibly elsewhere. The Bible was written the way it was because the people who it was originally written for would not have understood the real way life began.