Theory is the 4 letter word of science. I have an untested theory. For now, I can only believe that I can pick my nose with my little toe. Plausable, yes, but un-tested, un-measured, but just a belief. Now let me apply some research..... Yup, it worked. My theory just moved from belief to acceptance by applying research, and gaining facts on how, and why my theory is possible. Now my theory, like evolution has documented evidence to support it. However, many variable always exist. What if my toenails are very long, or I lost my little toe? More extensive research would be needed than the old tried and true method, but I would still be able to make a logical deduction in any case.Darthmatt

whats your point? are you saying science isunreliable or am i getting this completely backwards?

I am in High School, and only hear one side of this argument, the side of evolution. I do believe that some of evolution is correct, but the way it is taught, like a LAW of science is flawed. If school truly is a place to educate and teach us how to become articulate, well-rounded people, why is Creationism left out? Now I know that the separation of church and state may play a role here, but what harm is there in at least showing students another side of the debate? I for one, believe right now in a mixture of both, and I am a religious person. Then again, I live in one of the most liberal states in the US, Massachusetts. If school truly is a place of debate and learning, I just wish we could learn more than what some 70-year-old sitting in the statehouse thinks is right.

Because this thread is about protocol, not my opinion on whether or not it should be taught, here is what I think. Teachers should give some time to teaching about the theory along with evolution. They should mention that God is a possibility, and for a short time let an open debate occur on the two theories, and of course, the teacher should remain neutral, despite his/her opinions. This encourages deeper thoughts in us teens, something that seems to be lacking in others my age.......

Cube_of_MooN

School is not a place for debate, just learning. You go to university to debate and form your own opinions and theories. School is for teaching fact, not belief and evolution is an observable fact. Whether or no "god" started it all off is beside the point and should be left out of school because not everyone is christian

If we could time travel, people from the future would have come back already... Which is why I don't believe in fate.

MountainDew77

Not necessarily. Certain theories of time travel don't allow for travel further back than the moment the time machine was turned on. Which means the first time travellers won't turn up until the first time machine is turned on.

And if this isnt the case, we still couldnt travel back further than the big bang to watch it because time (and all other dimensions) break down at that point

It depends on your definition of religion. If you consider religion to be a collection of beliefs within an organization then athiesm is indeed a religion. If you consider religion to be an organized way for worshiping a god or gods then atheism is not a religion. Either way, however, atheism requires faith like that of any religion. There is no more proof that there is a god than not and vice versa. That isn't to say there isn't evidence going either way but I can find 'evidence' that chocolate milk comes from brown cows if I feel so inclined (poor analogy I know but it is what came to mind).

mindstorm

Atheism is not a religion anyway you look at it. It is the lack of believe in a "god", not the believe that there isno god. I am yet to be convinced of the existence of a supernatural creator, therefore i am not a theist, i am an atheist.

If i told you there was a teacup floating in space between earth and mars, would you believe me? I cant prove it does exist, but neither can you prove it doesnt

[QUOTE="Mumbles527"]Nah, all Star Wars was was a complete rip of LOTR, only set in space. If you don't believe me, tell me which I'm talking about with my description here..."A young boy sets out to accomplish something that no one thinks he can do. Along the way, his old, masterful, wise mentor dies in the first part of the trilogy, only to help the young boy from the after life. Various people of weird, different races join the boy in his adventure to help him stop the bad guys."NathanHawkins

not just that...star wars was a rip off of mythology in many ways potentially...greek, roman, egyptian, sumerian...take your pick. I was speaking of the success of the two in my comment.

EDIT: not to mention a borrowing of Judeo-Christian traditions....again, potentially.

Both LotR and star wars conform to the concept of the monomyth. This is the idea that almost all mythologies from all over the world follow the same basic structure involving a young, innocent hero who goes on a journey of great danger and importance. There's more to it than that but i can't be bothered explaining it all. My point is, neither are rip offs of the other, they are both myths following the traditional mythical structure

I love the story from KotOR, it was such a good sci-fi story it inspired me to write my own