The question isn't so much how did it happen, but why did it happen, and the answer is it happened because it happened. Why did the Earth just happen to be in the right place at the right time? Because it happened. Because of the size of the Universe, it was simply bound to happen somewhere. Difficult questions don't always have simple answers.



Hang on a minute. Are you saying that Creationism is good because it's easy to learn? All creationism is is a blanket statement "A god, probably this God, probably created everything, somehow, probably the way it says in the Bible." What's to learn? True Creationism discounts the entire theory of species, as well as DNA, carbon dating, radiation dating, and anatomy in general - after all, unless the Creator was making a joke by including the vestigial appendix in order to cause life-threatening infections. Could you explain how Creationism is even biology? Seems like it's biology in the same way that Notepad is a word processor.

If you accept that life started as per the Judeo-Christian concept of the creation, that there was nothing and then God created everything, well then where did God come from? It's a simple question. But the answer is anything but. Essentially it's the same as where did the Big Bang come from?

Creationism doesn't promote the idea that whatever IS has evolved, it promotes whatever IS always has been. That idea leads us to plain look through a microscope and think,"WOW, I wonder what THAT evolved from!?" in creationism we just see it as it is and observe it,document it, and move on until further research is needed.

For crying out loud, I never it creationism was good because it's easier to learn, it's actually significantly harder when there's no made-up backstory like evolution. I'm just saying that creationistic curriculum is more advanced than evolutionary curriculum for many reasons, just not because it promotes creationism. 1. The public education system AND private education system use curriculum in high school that practically 7 years behind my current knowledge, 2. Most teachers use evolution as an excuse for something the book doesn't explain when asked a question on a test. Creationistic curriculum doesn't bother using itself as an excuse because the general idea is already there. 3. We don't bother trying to explain evolution or how life specifically began, we continue on with more important lessons that actually are worth a shit in today's world of people who don't give any. 3. There are too many theories within the idea of evolution itself that schools spend too much time indoctrinating their students to know when they could simply explain the general idea and actually educate these retards.
overall

Exactly my point, nobody has been alive long enough to know, to prove, and to show what is the absolute truth. I honestly believe science should spend its time researching what IS,not what ISN'T and never will be.

Science is meant to find answers. Nothing more. Nothing less.

But why answer a question if you have no absolute truth to the answer? Wouldn't that make it incorrect? If so, then every religion would also be wrong, which I have no problem with.

That's absurd. Every bit of visual proof? You mean, if one human cannot, in their head, know the entirety of every tiny facet of the progress of all life on the entire planet, then it must be bunk?

Evolution is a) self-evident b) scientifically proven in the same way that anything is scientifically proven - it is the best and most complete EXISTING model. Creationism is not even a model, it's simply choosing to ignore an absolutely vital part of science. If you remove evolution from the equation, all biology is simply documentation. There's no such thing as hereditary traits. There's no

As for the "Creationist science is not religious at all" argument, only religious people could ever make such an obvious contradiction. What Creationist science isn't is science. If not for the religious element Creationism would simply be arbitrarily declaring all science beyond a certain point as being unprovable. All science is partially based on good estimates, that's how progress is made. You make an assumption which allows you to proceed to a new area of study, and work in that area then in reverse proves or disproves the leap you made. Creationism is a like a foreign land on a map marked "Here be dragons".

And could you please explain the great leaps forward in education this adds up to? Sounds like a pamphlet for a Christian college "Here's what scientists DON'T want you to know..." It boggles the mind.

I go to a major research university (Indiana University, Bloomington, member of the Big Ten, and one of 60 members of the Association of American Universities a group made up of America's leading research universities) and I can tell you that you would be laughed out of the class if you mentioned creationism. Our intro biology courses have large sections covering basic evolutionary theory, and we also have advanced classes looking only at evolutionary theory.



What do you mean by that. Evolution has a lot more evidence on the table than creationism (the fossil record alone since there really isn't any tangible proof that an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent being or beings exist at all let alone that he/she/they created everything) and since evolution is a process it is probably occurring in some species in some facet right now, so saying that evolution isn't nor will it ever be isn't really true.

I am curious how you can explain the existence of things like carbon dating, I mean did God just throw in these really old dates to keep us off his trail like he's freaking Carmen Sandiego.

I believe that science isn't the reason as to why but the reason as to how. Whichever religion reigns as accurate if we ever find out that answer, would be supported by science, rather than itself being science. BUt then again, everything is a result of science, so I suppose technically religion is science. But what I"m trying to say is that science is more of evidence to a philosophy than the philosophy itself.

Science isn't a religion, it's THE religion. Science is the reason to how, and not why, and without it, there wouldn't be religion. And I'm agnostic btw, if ppl want to know where i come from.