Saturday, September 24, 2005

Creationism? Definitely a hoax

So, there seems to be a new sequence of events that seems incredulous, like the fact that I cannot write full 3 page essays on creationism and evolution, and the inevitable creationism versus evolution; the fact that the Eagles (Australia Rules, read: game) lost by 4 and that the Bush administration are all but squandering money not on the hurricane Katrina victims but on weapons and machinery AND troops to be sent to Iraq and some forsaken land of suicide bombers and extremists. So whats all the fuss about creationism? Is it a theory based solely on faith or scientific discoveries? Can I really say that it is a science? First of all, the afore-mentioned questions applied to the sensitivities of the human psyche. How can anyone ever prove God's existence? The simple answer is people just cannot use faith as a reason to prove a supreme creator's existence (see that I do not put a capital to the S and C). To justify this rationality one must get involved with the scope of the conception of the universe's inner workings. Only then can a person grasp the theories of creationism, to their realisation that such theories are conjured by like-minded individuals who do not understand the concept of the universe.

To even convince such people that the world did not come about within a week is to deprive yourself of the many opportunities you would have used to do much more effective work. Sometimes humans have this concept that just because a book revered as a god's revelation meant that its words should be taken with gravity but in fact it is just a book for people to immerse themselves in to past the day. I admit that some of the words hold true the nature of human character and that some of its guidelines to living a fulfilled life could be applied. But what I can never comprehend is the fact that people can just blindly follow a book and interpret it as a no hold barred instructions to wage war or evangelise; to even believe in a part of the ribcage being taken from the "first" man to create the "first" female is absolute gibberish. The fact is that evolution has done its work and the using of natural selection meant that we have both male and female individuals unlike the amoeba which uses mitosis to produce two different individuals (no gender/gender division). It also means that we cannot just come out being created from mud or some god's hand and voila we have a female companion because a god wants to give us some entertainment and pleasure which is indeed a faux pas.

Thursday, September 22, 2005

Come to think of it, life aint that bad. The only thing that stops me from being happy is the negative thought instilled in my mind after some bad hair day. And that said i can only assure that my muse is waning. Come BACK PLEASE!!!