Comments

In regard to dontbother's comment, for statistics on snakebite deaths in India alone see http://www.britishcouncil.org/learnenglish-central-trivia-india.htm , which states "In 1981, a thousand deaths were reported in Maharashtra State. In the Burdwan district of West Bengal 29,489 people were bitten in one year with 1,301 deaths. It is estimated that between 35,000 and 50,000 people die of snake bite each year among India’s population of 980 million." Or see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/5314104.stm , which states that in India "The Russell's Viper is one of the world's most deadly snakes, and it does most of its killing in India. At least 20,000 victims a year, mostly agricultural workers, suffer the fatal consequences of its bite - pain, vomiting and dizziness, followed by kidney failure. It's not a nice way to die." For Bryan's comment on evolution. sorry, evolutionary theory has been accepted by biologists and most other scientists for many decades. Creationists may still claim that there is a question about its validity in the world of science, but such statements are ludicrous. And, in case you are one of those creationists who don't understand the difference between a hypothesis and accepted scientific theory, though Einsteins' theories of general and special relativity are "just theories" also, they are still the basis of much of modern physics. As for evolution and the second law of themodynamics, as bobdole mentions, the earth is hardly a closed system. Perhaps reading " An Introduction to Entropy and Evolution" at http://www.asa3.org/asa/education/origins/thermo.htm might help you. As for your statement about the law of biongenesis, I would refer you to "The Law of Biogenesis" at http://theframeproblem.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/responding-to-intelligent-designcreationism-the-law-of-biogenesis/ . The law states that life forms such as mice, maggots, and bacteria cannot appear fully formed, not that life can't arise from non-life. I'd also suggest "Giant step toward artificial life" at http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2008/01/24/BAPNUKKE4.DTL&type=printable and "Bacteria make major evolutionary shift in the lab" at http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/dn14094-bacteria-make-major-evolutionary-shift-in-the-lab.html?feedId=online-news_rss20 How will your faith hold up in the coming decades as biological science advances, if you insist God can only have acted like a magician waving a wand to create all life exactly as it is today in a few days and would never use such a complex process as evolution? Many Christians (I'm assuming you belive you must reject current scientific theory, because you feel it conflicts with your faith) don't feel they must reject modern biological science in order to retain their faith. Even Pope Benedict XVI has stated that belief in evolution can coexist with faith ( see "Pope: Creation vs. evolution clash an ‘absurdity’" at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19956961/ )