I will not compose posts while doing several other tasks, causing me to make numerous spelling and grammar errors which totally undermine the point of said posts.
I will not compose posts while doing several other tasks, causing me to make numerous spelling and grammar errors which totally undermine the point of said posts.
I will not compose posts while doing several other tasks, causing me to make numerous spelling and grammar errors which totally undermine the point of said posts.
I will not compose posts while doing several other tasks, causing me to make numerous spelling and grammar errors which totally undermine the point of said posts.
I will not compose posts while doing several other tasks, causing me to make numerous spelling and grammar errors which totally undermine the point of said posts.
I will not compose posts while doing several other tasks, causing me to make numerous spelling and grammar errors which totally undermine the point of said posts.
I will not compose posts while doing several other tasks, causing me to make numerous spelling and grammar errors which totally undermine the point of said posts.
I will not compose posts while doing several other tasks, causing me to make numerous spelling and grammar errors which totally undermine the point of said posts.
I will not compose posts while doing several other tasks, causing me to make numerous spelling and grammar errors which totally undermine the point of said posts.
I will not compose posts while doing several other tasks, causing me to make numerous spelling and grammar errors which totally undermine the point of said posts.
Cheat. You used cut and paste. Stay behind one more hour and type each line out again.
Did Gaudere make you write that as a punishment? 
Much as I hate to spoil a good grammar rant, I have a minor nitpick. As far as I know, English is unique in capitalising the first-person singular nominative case pronoun. I certainly know of no other language in which the equivalent of “I” is capitalised.
I think the OP came and went.
Certainly none of the other languages I speak or have studied. None of the Romance languages do it; nor do any of the many languages that don’t use alphabets with capital letters.
I seem to recall there being some reason for it - “I” was easily confused with other words in Early Modern English or something along those lines; it’s not the same as the capitalization of the Spanish Usted or Italian Lei (“you”) that’s done out of respect.
You mean, masturbated like a mother fuck at showing up those damn evil-utionists, and then took a shit on our board?
Something like that, yeah.
If he’s gone, then I’ll lighten the mood with a quote:
Gaudere’s forms of punishment are much more sadistic. :rolleyes:
I think the OP quite successfully resisted being brainwashed in the areas of grammar, spelling and logic as well as evolution.
Wemph, iths werry hahd oo ype wif yorr footh een yorrmouth. Ayone goth kethip?
The OP may not have vanished on us; he or she just may be in the habit of logging on only once or twice a day. I know I’m liable to vanish for the weekend and technically, I shouldn’t be on-line now, since I’m waiting for a call.
JustWrightin, I’m about as hard-core a Christian as you’ll find around here, and I suppose you could say I “believe in” evolution in the same sense that I believe in the notion that oxygen is necessary for my body to continue living or that a complex process involving an internal combustion engine saw me through rush hour traffic from my job home. My belief in those notions is entirely different from my belief in God. Most notably, they can be scientifically proven. Cut off my supply of oxygen, and, based on what’s happened to untold numbers of other human beings through the centuries, and I will die, although I’d prefer you not conduct the experiment on me. Each process involved in my car getting me from work home can also be proved and demonstrated, and none of it involves “magical sky pixies” to use a term I’ve heard atheists use to describe people who believe in a deity.
Evolution is, simply, the most simple, elegant testable way we have of accounting for the way human beings, plants, animals, and all other living things came to be the way they are. If a theory comes along which suits the known facts better, evolution, too, will be discarded and, I suspect, with a lot less of a fight than Creationism.
Evolution, to me, is not incompatible with Christianity. Indeed, the more I know of evolution, biology, cosmology, and science in general, the more I am struck with awe and wonder that God should create such a beautiful, intricate, fascinating mechanism. Consider it a watch versus a sundial, if you will, or a fugue compared to a simple melody. As a Christian, I am commanded by Christ, Himself, to love God with all my mind, as well as all my heart and soul. To me that means I am to use my mind to ask questions, look at puzzles, and enjoy solving them, just as I assume God enjoyed creating them. Christ seldom if ever gave simple answers; instead, He tended to answer questions with questions and encourage those around Him to think!
If you’re a Biblical literalist and a Young Earth Creationist, I ask you to read the first two chapters of Genesis and answer one simple question: did God create birds before or after He created man? Yes, that is a trick question, and I will need you to cite which chapter and verse you’re basing your answer on. Here at the Straight Dope, especially in Great Debates, we’re rather big on cites. You see, it’s not simply a matter of knowing what you do or do not believe; around here, you’re expected to be able to explain why you do or do not believe something. Four years of hanging around here, having my faith questioned and learning from the beliefs of others have strengthened my faith immeasurably, even though I freely admit there are things I can’t fully explain. I wouldn’t want to believe in a God who could be fully explained by man, even though I gather there are some folks who’d be satisfied with nothing less.
Around here, most folks do “believe in evolution” in that they accept evolution as the most likely explanation for how somethings came to be the way they are, and I’m pretty sure that includes most of the Christians. We can tell you why, if you’ll let us. You’ve got yourself off to an interesting start here, and I wish you luck. If you’ll let yourself indulge in a bit of awe and wonder at the world, you’ll find this is a marvelous place to waste an evening! It can even be faith-affirming.
Good luck, and peace be with you. As for me, I’ll be vanishing for a while. That phone call I was waiting for came in while I was composing this.
CJ
I hate the word “belief”.
It means:
[list=A]
[li]A set of views, accepted as correct, that are based on evidence.[/li][li]A set of views, accepted as correct, without the need for evidence.[/li][/list]
Part of the problem, and a major influence on your religious views, is a failure on the part of the clergy to distinguish between the two.
Clearly, we need a control subject, i.e. someone who went to the same school as the OP and was subject to the same “brainwashing”. If he has a clue what evolutionary theory entails, it lends evidence to the notion that the OP… doesn’t.
Whoosh 
The evidence would mostly be from things like DNA and genetics - stuff you’d learn at university if you studied biology. (Just a guess since I only did some biology up to the 10th grade).
If an idea is unattractive, it doesn’t disprove it. e.g. say I thought the idea of non-Christians suffering in hell eternally wasn’t a nice thought, it wouldn’t prove that hell doesn’t exist… or say I didn’t like the idea of pollution leading to possible global warming that doesn’t disprove global warming, etc.
Well a majority of scientists agree that the theory of evolution is the best explanation for how species of animals and plants came into existence… and I guess the education system wants to keep you up to date with the latest science.
By the way, even if you want to be a creationist, to debate with evolutionists competently so that they take you seriously, or if you want to see how evolution and creationism compare (in case you are interested in truth) you need to learn about evolution! Since non-evolutionists are often religious people, they can learn about their own explanations about origins in their own time. (in addition to learning about evolution for the reasons I said before)
At the moment, the evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the Universe doesn’t end, it just keeps expanding forever. It’s 13.7 billion years old, +/- 1%. The possibility probably remains that it’s older than that and we can’t measure it, but I don’t think there’s any evidence to suggest that’s the case. The Universe doesn’t appear to be dense enough to one day slow down and collapse back into itself.
Gaudere is a dish best served cold.
It’s interesting that so many posts claim Darwin’s theory of evolution to be a provable scientific fact, when the theorist himself lamented on his death bed, that not one of his theories could be proven scientifically.
I think the OP has bailed (shocked, I’m shocked at such behavior), but on the chance he/she is lurking, here’s my take:
Evolution ain’t got a dog in this fight. Evolution says nothing about God. It explains “how,” but is not interested in “why.” As other have said, it is a testable, thesis which explains the presence and diversity of life on this planet. It is not a religion.
Unfortunately, some people find that the tenets of evolution rub up against the literal word of the bible and feel compelled to pick a fight, framed on religion. To them, and you, I say :“suck it up.”
If you don’t want to “believe” in evolution, then by all means, don’t believe in it.
If you want to teach your kids “creation science” or “intelligent design” or any other religious claptrap masquerading as science, then by all means do so. If you want to teach other people’s kids the same, please feel free-in Sunday school.
However, if you have a problem with the public school system teaching orthodox science, the problem is of your own making.