|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,916 Year: 4,173/9,624 Month: 1,044/974 Week: 3/368 Day: 3/11 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Original Intent Of the Bible | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: What you are suggesting is to utterly nullify several hundred years of research and invalidate the life's work of several hundred thousand (at least) scientists. You are living in a fantasy world if you think that Flood geology has any basis in reality. ------------------"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow- minded." -Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Look, if you are not interested in providing evidence to support your position on a debate board, then I am a bit at a loss as to why you are here. Are you sure you have no respone at all to anything I have pointed out or asked? Gee, if not, that sure seems like a point or two for science. Your silence is deafening. So, what archaeological evidence supports anything other than the existence of certain cities mentioned in the Bible?? Please back up your claim with evidence or retract the claim. I have been wondering, TB, how you feel about the Creationist's mangling of the second law of thermodynamics, since you have a PhD in Physics? You say that Creationists are so thorough, but they have been getting the 2nd LoT so very wrong (in varying ways) for years and years. When they get the 2nd LoT so wrong, why do you have confidence in their scholarship in other fields? (This is one of those examples of bad Creationist 'science' which I said that I could provide) ------------------"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow- minded." -Steve Allen, from "Dumbth" [This message has been edited by schrafinator, 05-21-2002] [This message has been edited by schrafinator, 05-21-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Well, you didn't really answer my question fully. You said that Creationists are very thorough. I pointed out that they have been mangling the 2nd LoT for years and years. I am wondering why it is you have such confidence in Creation "science" if they do such a disservice to Physics. ------------------"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow- minded." -Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: You can't possibly love science if you think what AIG and ICR are doing is anything remotely like science. You can't even know what science is if you think that they do science. I agree that there are more important things than science. We aren't talking about the relative importance of things. We are, actually, talking about science on this board. I would like you to convince me that Creation 'science' doesn't reject data based upon it being contradictory to their interpretation of scripture. [This message has been edited by schrafinator, 05-22-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
[QUOTE]
So eg, this means that horse/zebras/mules are a kind for example (I think). Biology and genomics is currently consistent with this idea. When more genomes are in this will clarify the issue. At the moment science is consistent with a world of several thousand distinct genomes.[/B][/QUOTE]
So, are Bonobos and Humans in the same "kind"? They are at least as closeley-related as zebras and horses.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: So far, all the genetic information we have is consistent with the morphological tree of life. What makes you think that things will be different in the future? Or, are you simply hoping against hope?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024