Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,912 Year: 4,169/9,624 Month: 1,040/974 Week: 367/286 Day: 10/13 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Searching for Truth with a Broken Flashlight
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 27 (584894)
10-04-2010 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jeff Davis
10-03-2010 3:09 PM


Most likely Hawley would agree with this quote from Robert J. Schneider's essay "HUMAN EVOLUTION AND THE IMAGE OF GOD"
quote:
I have learned to patiently keep on explaining that neither Darwin nor any other scientist studying human evolution has ever asserted that humans are descended from apes. What all have said is that the hominids, which include our species Homo sapiens, and the other primates, to which the family of the great apes belong, diverged from a common ancestor millions of years ago.
I doubt that someone who is disturbed by claims the we came from apes would find much comfort in even common ancestry with chimps.
About the only one of these that I find interesting is the following
quote:
-Belief in an infallible and inerrant Bible actually allows for the acceptance of biological evolution and common ancestry
My guess is that Hawley's interpretation of the Bible is non-literal (he does not indicate a literal reading) or that he does read the bible literally but sees some areas where the Bible is not as specific as literalistic YEC proponents suggest.
The following I found to be just a play on words.
quote:
-Gravity is not a fact and equally surprising is that it never will be. It, along with evolution, is an explanation based upon facts and verified through testing, i.e., a theory.
Gravity is both fact (apples do fall toward the center of the earth) and theory (general relativity). I suspect that most non scientists are familiar with the fact of gravity and would feel that they were being toyed with.
I'm probably not curious enough to buy Hawley's book.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jeff Davis, posted 10-03-2010 3:09 PM Jeff Davis has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 27 (584895)
10-04-2010 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Rahvin
10-04-2010 12:05 PM


Not Monkeys
We aren't monkeys, but apes. Monkeys are not apes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Rahvin, posted 10-04-2010 12:05 PM Rahvin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Coyote, posted 10-04-2010 2:54 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 27 (584903)
10-04-2010 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Jeff Davis
10-04-2010 2:43 PM


Jeff Davis writes:
What does the author mean by the creationists' global flood/sedimentary rocks argument coming from a teenager's vision? ...or will you merely "f" bomb again?
I took it to mean that Hawley does not believe there was a global or even a near global flood a few thousand years ago, and that Hawley believes Bible to be consistent with a local flood.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Jeff Davis, posted 10-04-2010 2:43 PM Jeff Davis has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 27 (585000)
10-05-2010 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Blue Jay
10-04-2010 3:51 PM


Bluejay writes:
gravity is not actually a theory at all, but just a pattern of observations that lacks a theory-level explanation (space-time curvature is, I think, the best hypothesis currently available).
Are you saying that general relativity is not a theory level explanation of gravity? I find that opinion surprising. I've never heard GR being called anything but a theory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Blue Jay, posted 10-04-2010 3:51 PM Blue Jay has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Blue Jay, posted 10-06-2010 3:44 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024