Probably because not all Christians support those kinds of creationism.foxhound_fox
Actually that is an excellent point. Since all religions dont agree on creationism or for that matter how god was involved in it ie the two basic beliefs:
1)God created all animals as they are now
2) god created the simple lifeforms which were the origion of all life, watching them grow and evolve under his guidence.
Why is it that they think it is so nesisary to teach one factions idea of how the world started? Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! in so many ways. The might be as many as 30 different religions or more in one class room and yet they pick the belief of only one to be taught in school? Yet another reason why creationism belongs in church not school.
Before I start with the debating lets just get my beliefs down on the table first so that there are no confusions.
Stance on creationism being taught as science in school: Straight out its not a science. I believe science as taught is school should be only relating to things which have been proved to be true or could possibly be proved true. For this very reason creationism is not science because short of God revelaing his existance it cannot be proved true. It belongs in the church where they have every right to teach it to those who are willing, so that these people can make their own minds up as to the nature of the universe.
View on Religion in general: I respect religion and those who believe it so long as their beliefs are not shoved down my throat.
My Religon: Athiest to some extent but I am willing to admit there are some things we cant explain with science.
I think the reason it isn't brought up is because creationists don't believe Neanderthals were a different species. That's the only reason I can think of. It's absurd, it's a fact that they did exist, they are related to humans, they are a different species which I read is in part why they went extinct. They were similar, but not enough to procreate and make hybrid Neanderthal/Homospaien offspring.ElectronicMagic
I dunno have you seen some people? I mean some of them practically walk with their knuckles on the ground XD
I saw a documentary some time ago which talked of a fossil child no older than 8 which they believed could have been a human hybrid. It had skeletal characteristics common to both neanderthals and homosapiens.
You actually like that pre-teen rubbish. Its such a groan feast, and its a musical... not a winning formula in my opinion.
And what do you mean comming only to theaters? don't movies usually come out to cinemas first before making their way to dvd or TV a couple of months later? O.o
The relevance on the origin of the universe applies directly to any religious debate as that is one of the fundamentals of every religion. (That and a desire to understand and cope with death) And I was stating my beliefs, which you brought into question, now can you see the relevancy or should I draw you a picture?clicketyclick
It's not relevant to what I stated, which is that none of your beliefs are based on proven facts. I brought into question not your absence of belief about the origin of the universe, but all your beliefs.
My beliefs are MUCH closer to being supported by proven facts than any religion. You see I only believe what can be proven AND coincides with all the knowledge I have been taught.
warbmxjohn
Again, as I keep repeating and I don't think you quite take my meaning yet, nothing you believe can be proven.
Yes but neither can yours? You people just keep going round and round in circles. You aren't listening to what the other is saying and seeing only what you want to see. quite amusing really :)
You know something? Even though I realise that in general the plot flow resembles Star Wars I really honestly dont care. I still like the books, though the first one was a little slow for my taste teh second one was a signifigant improvement.
Who really cares if the formula is the same if you can get enjoyment from reading them?
Log in to comment