Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,809 Year: 3,066/9,624 Month: 911/1,588 Week: 94/223 Day: 5/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Debate - Ongoing controversy, the EvC question
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 7 of 40 (5220)
02-21-2002 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by bkwusa
02-19-2002 12:02 AM


It seems to me that the only "issue" that can be debated, meaning that a outcome final one way or the other and not a polemic is the resultant is if someone is going to offer the world a new statistical theory that can move the equilibrium than the one currently under research by evolutionists. But this organization is too loose in the details to give the blue print back of one cell that it would have to be moving in a line that Newton considered to require the "divine Arm". This can be simply denied by evolutionists from a philosophy but as such is no bulwork to pragmatism found.
If one means that there will always be "two" sides I do not understand what this means for I enter the debate as a debate and not as the tension that results during debate. That people will not be forced into believe in GOD by nations seems the norm now rather than the rarities from which the statistical distribution was formed but to say one has all the theology on this seems infinitely premature (hence authority of Catholic CHURCH) as no one philosphically has expressed Cantors Math in a statistical deviation or miracle of providence this Arm of science Could supply the economy should the inifity transverse wise be clearly differentiated from light which It in truth might not.
But even with respect to the light, there is possible progress in giving more time to the use of mendelian "mechanism" in expts with living things by logic but again that would not say how the origin is/was and will only give a better predicative capability (if that) admitted in the small and the large that may be an Other line than Newton considered out set theory but most secular workers are not sensitive enough to make much progress in this Sholium (not Treatise)than seeking a compatiblilty with the Church in the sitting in good behavior also needed should the debate itself rest. May God save us.
That there can be peace in this world I do believe and that any threats can be adjudicated in time we all hold in common (1925 trial envirnoment need not be this "common") I can only hope.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by bkwusa, posted 02-19-2002 12:02 AM bkwusa has 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