Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationism Road Trip
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 46 of 409 (678612)
11-09-2012 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by jar
11-09-2012 10:47 AM


Re: On discrimination
jar writes:
But the issue remains; we do not seem to be teaching kids to discriminate and looking at social media (internet, cable TV, Twitter, Pinterest, the apps in App Stores, ...) it seems that the trend is towards emotional and immediacy as driving forces and not discrimination.
Ah... I think I see what you're saying.
I also totally agree.
I don't mean to imply that the coming generation I'm talking about is "perfect" or somehow going to be impervious to scams or mistakes or dishonest tactics.
I'm just saying that I think they're going to be better than us at it as a general population (and that doesn't really take too much).
I think it's going to be significantly better than us, too. But even that is still a long way from "as good as it can be"... or even "good" (hopefully we'll get there, though... in a few hundred years).
The tools they have available, and the possibility/potential for being better than us is incredibly higher than it was even just 20-30 years ago. The rest is nothing more than my own faithfully optimistic theory on how it can pan out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by jar, posted 11-09-2012 10:47 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by jar, posted 11-09-2012 11:25 AM Stile has replied
 Message 50 by kofh2u, posted 11-09-2012 5:40 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 47 of 409 (678615)
11-09-2012 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Stile
11-09-2012 10:57 AM


Re: On discrimination
I hope that is the case, BUT I have strong reservations that it will happen.
A short personal aside:
I'm of the generation that was directly involved in some pretty profound changes in the US, the Vietnam War and the opposition to it, the desegregation movement, voting rights, the sexual revolution and women's rights and the early days of the communications and computer age.
While the parts I played were relatively minor, I was able to at least be a spectator.
A couple short anecdotes.
During the early days of the opposition to the War in Vietnam I helped conduct a survey that had two key questions.
One was whether or not we should get out of Vietnam.
The second key question asked "Our French ally has asked for our support to stop Communist Chinese from invading French Indochina; should we aid our ally?"
Many of the respondents that answered the former question with "Yes" also answered "Yes" to the latter question.
The second anecdote was later when I was designing some of the first Cable TV systems which would bring as many as twelve channels to a home instead of the two or three that were available over the air. The company I was working for was testing some set top converters that would allow even more channels and two way transmission and we were discussing the future that broadband communications would allow. There were lots of exciting possibilities, real time voting, education, but the consensus was that it would end up at the lowest common denominator, 100s of entertainment channels.
Look at what is seen today on the History Channel, the NatGeo channel, the Science channel ...

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Stile, posted 11-09-2012 10:57 AM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Stile, posted 11-09-2012 12:04 PM jar has seen this message but not replied
 Message 53 by Omnivorous, posted 11-09-2012 6:46 PM jar has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 48 of 409 (678617)
11-09-2012 12:04 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by jar
11-09-2012 11:25 AM


Re: On discrimination
jar writes:
There were lots of exciting possibilities, real time voting, education, but the consensus was that it would end up at the lowest common denominator, 100s of entertainment channels.
Look at what is seen today on the History Channel, the NatGeo channel, the Science channel ...
I agree.
My point only seems to have some backing because it does seem to be happening and it does seem to be having a difference.
Like bullying in schools becoming the very large issue it should have been years ago.
This is a product of the internet's "lowest common denominator" (that is... "entertaining", high-impact news).
What I'm saying is that the stuff I'm talking about depends upon the "lowest common denominator" of the internet.
Which is why I personally think that it has so much power... but only time will tell.
Basically (and possibly ironically?) I see this:
The internet, through it's lowest common denominator of spreading sensationalistic news... has forced the beginning of an indoctrination of "open-mindedness" into the education system (example - "bullying is bad"). Because it's not being "learned as an individual" and more "taught as indoctrination" as the basic public school system works... that's also the "lowest common denominator".
So, my thoughts is that all these open-minded people are going to be socially connected... and they're basically going to "bully" people into also being open-minded and relying on facts.
I understand that the correct way to do this would be to re-invent the education system such that the indoctrination wouldn't be necessary and people could actually learn "for real" why this is a good thing.... but my point is that this is all happening anyway.... it's actually being forced along by "the lowest common denominator" inherent within the systems that are in place.
What I'm saying is that this is the first time in history (that I'm aware of) that a generation is being forced along this path by way of the lowest common denominators within the systems they are going to grow up within.
My "faithfully hopeful theory" is that this will provide a significantly higher number of people that will actually learn "the real and right way" of critical thinking to come to the same conclusions. And then (again, hopefully) maybe they will be able to change the systems from "lowest common denominator" into better, real education and such.
But I agree it's still possible for it to mean nothing at all, or to be all swept away by the next "Justin Beiber." I just think it's so significantly different... that it just might have a good chance of taking hold.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by jar, posted 11-09-2012 11:25 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3819 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 49 of 409 (678655)
11-09-2012 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Theodoric
11-09-2012 9:37 AM


Re: One Day
Theodoric
This is De facto, a Tax on the larger society, re-distributed to workers in key economic positions, and add-on in the price of the goods
Not a tax in any sense of the word. If this were true. ANything the owner makes is a "a Tax on the larger society,..and add-on in the price of the goods."
You are really a funny guy if you believe a raise in your Public Utility costs isn't tax money which has merely circumvented the normal collection process simply because you re-define the connotation of the word Tax or those other words you need review.
When the Teachers Union demands full pay retirement benefits after 30 years employment, the Real Estate Taxes MUST go up to get that money set aside into their retirement fund.
It you own a home, review the tax paid to your county every year and you will see than @80% of that tax is School Tax.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Theodoric, posted 11-09-2012 9:37 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by nwr, posted 11-09-2012 5:44 PM kofh2u has not replied
 Message 56 by Theodoric, posted 11-09-2012 9:57 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3819 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 50 of 409 (678656)
11-09-2012 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Stile
11-09-2012 10:57 AM


Re: On discrimination
Mr Stiles:
also totally agree.
I don't mean to imply that the coming generation I'm talking about is "perfect" or somehow going to be impervious to scams or mistakes or dishonest tactics.
I'm just saying that I think they're going to be better than us at it as a general population (and that doesn't really take too much).
I think it's going to be significantly better than us, too. But even that is still a long way from "as good as it can be"... or even "good" (hopefully we'll get there, though... in a few hundred years).
The tools they have available, and the possibility/potential for being better than us is incredibly higher than it was even just 20-30 years ago. The rest is nothing more than my own faithfully optimistic theory on how it can pan out.
Again you are unthinking and misled by failure to delve deeper into the facts and accept the platitudes that a liberal minded feminist society indoctrinates you with.
The facts are that America has TWO kinds of kids, asdetailed and definitively described by Chas Murray in his recent book, "Coming Apart."
With Welfare families now raising almost half of the kids in America, these fatherless children are responsible for 70% of all social problems, including High School drop out, failing schools, and violent crime.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Stile, posted 11-09-2012 10:57 AM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


(1)
Message 51 of 409 (678657)
11-09-2012 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by kofh2u
11-09-2012 5:32 PM


Re: One Day
When the Teachers Union demands full pay retirement benefits after 30 years employment, the Real Estate Taxes MUST go up to get that money set aside into their retirement fund.
Nonsense. Typical right wing nonsense.
In most of the cases that I am aware of, the teachers union negotiated retirement benefits. They would have preferred a pay increase. They settled for retirement benefits, as a kind of delayed payment for their services.
If taxes are going up now to pay teachers retirement benefits, then blame the politicians. If the politicians had taken the money that they had saved by paying lower salary, and put that into an investment account, there would be no problem paying those retirement benefits.

Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by kofh2u, posted 11-09-2012 5:32 PM kofh2u has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Omnivorous, posted 11-09-2012 6:40 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied
 Message 90 by Aware Wolf, posted 11-15-2012 10:06 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3977
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


(4)
Message 52 of 409 (678662)
11-09-2012 6:40 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by nwr
11-09-2012 5:44 PM


Re: One Day
nwr writes:
In most of the cases that I am aware of, the teachers union negotiated retirement benefits. They would have preferred a pay increase. They settled for retirement benefits, as a kind of delayed payment for their services.
If taxes are going up now to pay teachers retirement benefits, then blame the politicians. If the politicians had taken the money that they had saved by paying lower salary, and put that into an investment account, there would be no problem paying those retirement benefits.
The parallel scenario on the corporate side is even more despicable.
As a United Auto Workers member in the 1970s, I watched my union accept pension funding in lieu of pay increases.
The contributions required to fund those pensions were determined by law; however, in response to corporate lobbying, "temporary" shortfalls were allowed by Congressional action.
As a consequence, conservatives were able to point at fictitious labor costs based on theoretical pension contributions that the automakers were not, in fact, making.
Fast forward a few decades, and corporations throughout the U.S. are allowed, in bankruptcy court, simply to sever their pension agreements (and labor contracts in toto) or, alternatively, to abandon them to the federal insurance program.
Adding insult to injury, conservatives rail against government bailouts of the auto industry (caused primarily by mismanagement, e.g., failing to produce cars people actually wanted) because they did not hurt workers enough in pay and pension terms.
Conservatives blame worker interest-protecting unions for the noncompetitive nature of U.S. industries. In truth, the unions for the most part failed miserably to even enforce corporate contractual obligations.
Now we have most working people relying on 401(k)s and Social Security, the former woefully inadequate and the latter under assault by conservatives. Teachers and government workers, among the last few to enjoy traditional pensions, are demonized as thugs and leeches. Meanwhile, Romney stuffs his tax-protected IRA (enacted to encourage the working/middle classes to save for retirement) with more than $100,000,000.
I progress through my seventh decade at a loss to understand why we aren't all taking to the streets.
Edited by Omnivorous, : No reason given.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by nwr, posted 11-09-2012 5:44 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3977
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 53 of 409 (678663)
11-09-2012 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by jar
11-09-2012 11:25 AM


Re: On discrimination
jar writes:
One was whether or not we should get out of Vietnam.
The second key question asked "Our French ally has asked for our support to stop Communist Chinese from invading French Indochina; should we aid our ally?"
You could also have asked,
"We promised to block the recolonization of Asian and African nations by European powers after the war. Should we keep that promise?"

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by jar, posted 11-09-2012 11:25 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by jar, posted 11-09-2012 6:53 PM Omnivorous has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


(1)
Message 54 of 409 (678666)
11-09-2012 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Omnivorous
11-09-2012 6:46 PM


Re: On discrimination
And when Ho Chi Min asked the US to support a democratic election refused to even meet with him or consider an election.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Omnivorous, posted 11-09-2012 6:46 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Omnivorous, posted 11-09-2012 7:12 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3977
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 55 of 409 (678670)
11-09-2012 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by jar
11-09-2012 6:53 PM


Re: On discrimination
Yep. We had a real knack for turning nationalists into Communists in those days.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by jar, posted 11-09-2012 6:53 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 56 of 409 (678694)
11-09-2012 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by kofh2u
11-09-2012 5:32 PM


Re: One Day
Words have definitions. You really should use the accepted definitions.
You are really a funny guy if you believe a raise in your Public Utility costs isn't tax money which has merely circumvented the normal collection process simply because you re-define the connotation of the word Tax or those other words you need review.
I have no idea what these means or what you are trying to say here. Want to try again and attempt a coherent sentence?
When the Teachers Union demands full pay retirement benefits after 30 years employment, the Real Estate Taxes MUST go up to get that money set aside into their retirement fund.
So teachers shouldn't get a retirement? What is your point here?
It you own a home, review the tax paid to your county every year and you will see than @80% of that tax is School Tax.
How would you know what % of my taxes goes toward schools? It is actually a little under 50%. I have no problem with what I pay in property taxes. I get good value for the taxes I pay.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by kofh2u, posted 11-09-2012 5:32 PM kofh2u has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 57 of 409 (679248)
11-13-2012 2:34 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by DevilsAdvocate
11-07-2012 9:07 PM


One Silly Misconceived Road Trip
Watched the video, boy is it a misbegotten piece of nonsense. You guys actually think it reveals anything of value?
First, how can you justify the basic craziness of getting a bunch of clearly average believers together with professional scientists and think anything about the creation-evolution debate could be revealed this way? The "creationists" on the bus trip hardly know anything about creationism or the Bible either for all I can tell, or science of any sort. They are clearly inexperienced in this sort of debate, but you pit them against working scientists and consider that a fair contest? Well, it's what happens here too, though in that case I assume the participants were chosen. Couldn't they have done better? If not, why have such a challenge at all, it's meaningless. However, it wasn't really meant to be a challenge, something the creationists might have answers to. Clearly the whole point was to break through their belief with what they consider to be the enlightening truths of science. Which is the point of EvC too.
It's rather telling it seems to me that the most popular "creationist" to some on this thread was JoJo who is no Bible believer, probably doesn't know much Bible at all, supports gay rights as if the Bible has nothing to say about that, obviously has a merely sentimental "belief" which can hardly be called faith. But it figures she'd be popular here. True believers are the ones you guys can't make sense of.
And of course the least popular were the two strongest believers. I'll grant that Bronwyn doesn't seem to know much either, unfortunately, she just has a firm grip on what seems like a blind faith and how much Bible knowledge is behind that is impossible to tell though I'd have to guess not much. But her faith seems genuine. She knows that anything that contradicts the Bible is false. Yes, we must know that, but of course that's the most scorned position here. We know it's God's word, it can't be contradicted.
Sam was harder to read or for some reason I didn't pay a lot of attention to him, but he seemed to end up in a position similar to Bronwyn's.
Phil was of course the most disliked because he was combative, at least after a while. He probably has the most Bible knowledge although even that is hard to assess from the video. He was right to say that it's not fair to expect him or the others to be able to answer a professional geologist. These guys were TOTALLY unprepared. The whole trip was badly misconceived.
Nobody cracked a Bible that I noticed. Did I miss it?
Then there were the sad excuses for "science" that were used to "challenge" this poor sad lot of "creationists. I could hardly believe the silliness of the "experiment" the geologist did to "prove" that a Flood couldn't have cut the Grand Canyon. A bucket of water poured on a slight slope. Huh? I did a whole long post on this at my blog, but I don't feel like repeating it here yet.
The chimp was another sad excuse. What on earth does it prove to ask people how they "feel" about being "related" to this creature? I never felt anything when I was an atheist evolutionist, I just accepted it. Nobody becomes a Christian because they don't like the idea of being related to chimps. Where's the science here?
What was that fountain in the desert all slimed with bacteria supposed to prove anyway?
Oh and Jerry Coyne "challenged" them with the ridiculous idea of a whale being on the ark. Well, don't you see, it wouldn't fit, you couldn't HAVE a whale on the ark. Well, no you couldn't and they didn't. Sea creatures were not on the ark, why would they be? They had a planet covered with water to live in. Good grief.
Remember, some of you guys said this video was, I think, "enlightening?" You need to get out more.
What else. Oh yes, the skulls that "prove" that human beings evolved from something less human. Why? Because they were said to have been found in the expected order from bottom to top of a deep stack of strata in Ethiopia. That's the whole logic of evolution right there, the Evidence. Is it proof? Of course not. It's only theory, or conjecture, as the Muslim creationist intelligently said. To the scientist it's as good as fact. Well, what can you say, it's not. It's conjecture, it's theory, it's interpretation. They ASSUME the stack represents millions of years of time from ancient to modern and then they interpret its contents as having evolved from one period to another. This is bizarre from many points of view. Oh well. Anyway, if you don't assume time but rather a single deposition of all the layers at once, as I and some Floodists do, you come up with a whole other interpretation of the evidence.
And, what else. Oh yes, the dinosaurs. I never understood why it seems so improbable to some that humans could have occupied the same planet with these beasts. As one of the creationists said, we occupy the planet with other predators, why not these? But actually it's possible, not really clear from the Bible but possible, that just as people ate no meat until after the Flood, animals may not have eaten meat either. They were originally created to eat plants, all of them. Whether or not that changed at the Fall is not revealed, but certainly it would have changed after the Flood when human beings became meat-eaters too. {ABE: Reading in Genesis came on the verse about God's telling Noah to stock "food" on the ark. I have to think that can only refer to plant food, He wouldn't have been requiring animal food when the whole point is to save the animals. Should have been obvious before. So now I'm convinced all the animals lived on plants before the Flood and some became meat-eaters afterward just as people did. Probably because the plant life after the Flood was so devastated and not really enough, in quantity or quality, to sustain all the animals and humans as well. So now I'd argue that there was no danger to humans from the dinosaurs before the Flood anyway, and afterward they don't seem to have survived very well.}
In any case, the entire Fossil Record a few miles deep is a record of what died in the Flood. Of course humans and dinosaurs lived together.
I think that's all the "science" that was attempted.
I was also interested in how Phil "explained" why he thinks unbelievers refuse to believe -- They refuse to accept the idea of being judged for their sins. That never made sense to me. I had no idea of sin or judgment until well after I believed. But maybe it's true for some, who knows.
But there are equally silly ideas on the other side, such as Jerry Coyne's explanation for how hard it is for them to get through to creationists - we get too much comfort from our "delusion" and all that. Sigh. Nope, we just believe God. We really BELIEVE Him.
Besides, when you confront us with whales on the ark all we can do is roll our eyes.
Edited by Faith, : Add ABE about animals becoming meat eaters after the Flood

He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 11-07-2012 9:07 PM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Tangle, posted 11-13-2012 5:42 AM Faith has replied
 Message 70 by nwr, posted 11-13-2012 8:52 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 76 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 11-14-2012 6:58 PM Faith has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 58 of 409 (679260)
11-13-2012 5:42 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by Faith
11-13-2012 2:34 AM


Re: One Silly Misconceived Road Trip
Faith writes:
First, how can you justify the basic craziness of getting a bunch of clearly average believers together with professional scientists and think anything about the creation-evolution debate could be revealed this way? The "creationists" on the bus trip hardly know anything about creationism or the Bible either for all I can tell, or science of any sort.
It's the mind-set that revealing.
When confronted by an expert, professional scientist, talking about his lifetime's study, no-one but an equivalently knowledgeable person CAN debate with him/her. It's not a debate, its a chance to learn from a world expert.
The ONLY reason to dispute anything any of the experts were saying was their belief in a particular religious idea (and not even the same religious idea). Because of that belief, they couldn't accept anything they were being told - the couldn't accept it not because they had any contradictory evidence but because they believed something different.
It must be really hard to maintain that level of dissonance.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Faith, posted 11-13-2012 2:34 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Faith, posted 11-13-2012 6:40 AM Tangle has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 59 of 409 (679266)
11-13-2012 6:40 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by Tangle
11-13-2012 5:42 AM


Re: One Silly Misconceived Road Trip
The mind-set is faith in the true God. If it's true faith it isn't going to yield no matter what you think ought to make it yield, because we KNOW God, we've EXPERIENCED His truth and His faithfulness through His word.
You think that's a sort of craziness partly because you actually think there is evidence for the "science." All I've ever seen, after working through it many times over, is illusion, not evidence, illusion aggressively enforced as if it really were evidence.
This video, however, is so laughable science-wise even all of you should be groaning at it. There's PLENTY to dispute in this film, it's STUPID "science" and straw man tactics. The geologist's notion thatwater on the scale of a worldwide Flood could be modeled by the pouring of a bucket on the ground is, well, it's demented. I know more physics than that. A whale on the ark is ignorant of the Bible, but lacking in just plain common sense.
Of course if all you want is to dazzle barely educated creationists with the aura of hotshot scientists and don't really care about the science part, you ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
Evolution is not science, it's all smoke and mirrors. Science is something else.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Tangle, posted 11-13-2012 5:42 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Tangle, posted 11-13-2012 7:05 AM Faith has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 60 of 409 (679270)
11-13-2012 7:05 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Faith
11-13-2012 6:40 AM


Re: One Silly Misconceived Road Trip
Faith writes:
Evolution is not science, it's all smoke and mirrors. Science is something else.
It's not just evolution (ie biology) that's wrong though is it? It's physics, geology, palaeontology, astronomy, genetics, molecular biology, embryology and in the end maths and chemistry.
You have to throw away ALL of modern science in order to believe what a YEC believes. Beats me how they have the gall to use a PC.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Faith, posted 11-13-2012 6:40 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Faith, posted 11-13-2012 7:27 AM Tangle has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024