(no subject)

[theducks]

Why is it that in 2002, we still need articles like this one to specify why creationism is a bunch of crap? Sigh. Idiots. If you believe in creationism and are offended, read that article. However, chances are that you wouldn't understand it anyway.

Maybe evolution is wrong, why do people who believe in creationsim get to keep reproducing? :P Evolution says they should be a dying breed ;) If you feel the need to believe that god created us all, well then fine. Believe that god started evolution, and it's going along according to his/her plan, but you can't say that people have not evolved since they were first placed here.

Look at Australians. We are a relatively new nation, 200 years or so. I think there's some physical differences between us and the english.. we don't have almost universally bad teeth for example, and other things like that. Already in 212 years, Australians are starting to evolve :)

Bwahah.

(I should really be packing, I know ;)

Comments

[blu.livejournal.com]

Hehe, damn people. :p It doesn't seem to make sense how society seems to be devolving. All in a struggle to gain power, I suppose. :p St00pid people. After taking a number of my psych courses (especially my animal behaviour course last year) people who rant against evolution seem like completel idiots. I mean, they did before, but after studying evolution it's like... DUHHHHHH.

*huggles*

[xphile101.livejournal.com]

Thanks for being really offensive, Alex.

Really.

[theducks.livejournal.com]

No worries.

I'm ok with the idea of a creator creating something some time ago, and even guiding what's happened to it since then, but I can't stand the thought that nothing on earth ever changes. If god influences how people act in every day life, surely he/she can influence how things evolve? :)

[fingolfin.livejournal.com]

well, i'm certainly not a creationist. i think its an interesting theory, and one that doesnt necessarily need to be divorced from evolution, since evolution could be directed by a creative force. BUT, and here's the rub, why is it some people insist on preaching evolution or creationism as a knowable fact? i mean, unless one was there to witness creation, there can be no proof of its legitemacy. teleological arguments dont work. ontological arguments dont work. Or in the case of evolution, we have witnessed one kind of evolition (micro-evolution, where a bird developes a different beak design to survive different situations.) but a micro-evolved darwinian finch is still a FINCH. it is not a new species. and thats the problem. we have never witnessed a case of macro evolution where some living sludge beings become three legged hover-beasts or what-ever. there is no way, especially with the lack of the "missing link" to tie these former species to current ones in a causal way. just because there are genetic similarities , there is no logical reason to make the leap to believing macro-evolution. its a logical leap. a leap of faith!! i guess its good to know even in our scientific age, scientifically minded people are still capable of leaps of faith, and of religiously defending (zealously i might add) unknowable, currently unprovable (un dis-provable too) theories of why, when ,how, and for what . ;)

[singularity.livejournal.com]

Sadly they are needed to counter arguements made by creationists/intelligent design people. There have been major pushes (some successful and some decisions pending) in allowing the ID ideas taught in school. So we would need people to write articles like that to counter the BS taught in school.

What's really messed up is that science classes always emphasize the idea of scientific methodology. With ID being taught in school, you destroy all that work by saying that you use scientific methodology with everything except this since creationism will be taught in science classes. Blah