Is this why there in evolution denial and have to make obserd claims all the time?\nA child gets extra presents from Santa.\nChristians, just loose their muney..therefore which is the gullible one?
127455
I'd say no, they don't know.  I was a Christian till about 18 months ago - I very sincerely thought it was right.  As far as I can tell, the Christians I know all really think Christianity is factually true.
347295
It is!!! no really !!!  We have not read or heard of that theory, oh ... well for at least a thousand times.\n\nOh please.  Well, you just live and let live.  You don't like it, no one is forcing you to celebrate Christmas.  Please, have a life and let other have enjoy theirs.
642776
So, what's your problem?\n\nThe text you pasted supports evolutionary science.  Every year more discoveries by archaeologists and paleontologists add more content to support the principles of evolution.\n\nA "theory" is a proposition put to test by empirical study.  In science, very little is considered hard and fact TRUTH - today's truth is usually tomorrow's error.  Evolution is in this sense theoretical, but the evidence all supports it.  And the quote you delivered says that the writer strongly endorses evoltionary science.\n\nThere is NO evidence for alternative concepts, especially that mythology out of some "holy book."\n\nWork on your reading and critical understanding.  You're trying, but you aren't there yet.
531257
love the question it makes one think\nyour points are all valid \ni would also go so far as to say their is as much proof for the existence of ghosts /dragons /vampires etc as their is for the existence of god so i agree these questions should be asked in the mythology section \nbe prepared for some answers from angry Christians\nwith reference to the answer before mine  i have seen proof of dinosaurs [evolution ]but i have never seen gods bones \nby that logic aliens exist as  you can not prove they don't
388538
Santa Claus is a myth based in truth taught to children when they grow up.\n\nIt began as Nicholas Klause hundreds of years ago. Saint Nick (as he came to be known) used to make toys for children and give them out to good little girls and boys on Christmas Day. Bad little girls and boys got nothing but a lump of coal.\n\nSanta Claus is a change in name.\n\nNicholas Klause is long dead but the spirit of what he did lives on. And so his story continues to be taught.\n\nThough, in it's modern incarnation, the parents are actually the people that give out the toys and Santa Claus' name. Most children are told the truth about Santa by the time they're 10 years old.\n\nThe legend is useful for parents to keep control of their little kids behavior (after all, who wants to not get any presents on Christmas Day?) and to allow children to retain their innocence for a while and enjoy the thought that magic actually exists.\n\n:)
546655
People like my Mom think that either 1) scientists are mistaken or 2) there's a giant conspiracy that all of the scientists are in on to try to disprove God.  It's ridiculous if you ask me, and I'm a Christian who totally supports the notion of evolution.  One doesn't exclude the other, but watch, all of the Christians who have never studied evolution and merely taken their pastor's word will give me a thumbs down.
100242
I think it's so funny that so-called scholars believe in evolution.  I say let them believe, that just shows how stupid they are.  If evolution were true, I ask who caused it to start, I would still give God the credit.  If there was a "big bang", then it was God that caused it.
121696
My husband and I agreed, much to the dismay of my family, that we would never tell are children that Santa or the Easter bunny brought their presents.  We feel that if you lie to a child once about something as small as that, they will choose not to believe you about other more important things, they will label you a liar, and we didn't want that. Our children are fine and don't care, my son has agreed not to tell other children out of kindness, and my daughter one year decided to believe in Santa on her own, and then the next year told us he wasn't real, that mommy and daddy were Santa.  So, I guess in the end kids will figure things out for themselves.
542705
Santa's not real?!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! My parents told me Santa wasn't real at a very young age. My family was very religious and they didn't want me to Skew what they felt was the true meaning of Christmas(Jesus) So I never really took the news that hard...the problem was getting me to stop telling other kids Santa wasn't real. I felt it was my 5 year old duty to tell them the truth...needless to say not many people liked me in kindergarten.
2758
This is a very good question. As we all know that the true meaning of Christmas is gone and now turned into a commercial holiday. As for Santa Claus, telling a child about his or her presents came from the guy in the red suit, its just a tradition that's been passed on for many generations. In a way it is lying but as the child grows older and realized that there is really no Santa Claus then it gives the child the sense of what is real and what is not. As for the lying parents, I'm sure that when they were a kid, they've been lied to by their own parents so  like I said it is then passed on, and will continue for many many years.
584567
From the mouths of babes come such honest, simple questions. I remember many defining moments similar to the one you relate from when I asked my mother questions as a child. When I realized Santa Claus couldn't actually make it around the world in one night, I questioned the feasibility of the omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent nature of God myself! Pretty good questions, pretty obvious answers! How those adults expect us to accept such nonsensical notions through faith is ridiculous.
295368
origins are hard for small minds to wrap around.  Modern minds are conditioned to getting answers in a few seconds of a soundbite, otherwise they are bored.  Some teenagers still believe in the easter bunny and santa clause. It wasn't Adam and Steve.  Yes, evolution is a process that takes millions of years, not a soundbite of a few seconds. Evolution may seem to have stages, but they never stop. If you don't believe in the concept of evolution, you don't believe in the concept of graduation and may have to get a job at the level of the rest of us apes.
650137
How sacreligious you are!!! The bunny and Santa are make believe. God is real and true and He is my Heavenly Father. I hope you come to know Him and trust one day.
215878
i don't understand why some atheists think that the existence of dinosaurs is some huge earth shattering knock against the bible.  yeah they existed.  do you have a point you are trying to make?\n\nedit: dude, you think penn and teller are funny?  what's next, pimping carrot top?
229060
Excellent post.\n\nI get quite tired of the strawman versions of evolution and the scientific method trotted out by creationists.\n\nFor example, the big bang has nothing to do with evolution.  Zero.  \n\nWhere the first life form came from has nothing to do with evolution.  Zero.\n\nA theory is simply the best explanation for observable data.  We witness the diversity of life around us, and we must explain it somehow.  It is NOT meant to be proven.  Theories, in general, are not intended to be proven.\n\nFor example, gravity is a theory.  Is gravity false?  No.  Does gravity follow certain rules?  Absolutely!  Yet it is still a theory, and there ain't nothing wrong with that.\n\nYou well noted that some mechanisms of evolution are still not completely understood.  The theory, while perfectly valid, is not completely explained (just like gravity).  However, what creationists must keep in mind is that if any theory is going to replace evolution, it must explain ALL the evidence and data we have collected.  Genetics, fossil record, geological record, geographic isolation and allele frequency shift.\n\nAt the very best creationism (or ID) only points at the parts that science has not explained.  It offers no real alternative theory.\n\nLastly, the idea of "proof" for a "miracle" (meaning God's flooding of the earth) is oxymoronic, at best.  If there is proof (meaning observational data we can see today) then there is a natural explanation and God had nothing to do with it.  If it was a miracle, then there would be no evidence (since God suspended natural laws to make it happen).  Silly Christian fundamentalists, they want to have their cake and eat it too.
314834
I'm very skeptical of a "god" gene.  A "gullibility" gene seems much more likely.\n\nYes, it is unfair to those who have been saddled with such a gene.  They'll have to work extra hard to overcome their disability.
595217
There interpritations range from acceptance to out right denial, and I for one (while not Christain anymore) do believe in we evolved over time. My reason for this is that we humans cannot truly say what a 'day' is to the Divine, and the word humanoid means human like in apperance, movement or shape, not that it is human.\n\nI do not think it is a hoax, there is so much about this world that is not discused in the Bible. So I would say that evolution happened, and that while a part of would like to rant on this topic I won't do it. That would be disrespectful to everyone, and I don't want that.