Is God Required for a life to have Direction and Purpose?

If baramins are needed to multiplex network nodes into a physical space that does not follow basic principles Einstein believed in that had him not taking Kant seriously and this is done with the future of space exploration explictly in pedagogy there is the possiblity that specifying creation in this manner, both, and any use (but not all or every) of scientific method results in being able to re-read; read further.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brad McFall:
If baramins?

---

let us leave this open question mark for now- I assume you know that a baramin is a term in creationist work that may in fact refer to like kinds, I supppose, thought after the kind not merely thought after some significant number of biologists but this may indeed be incomplete, I do not know.

quote:

---

are needed to multiplex network nodes?

---

If one thinks of naming wholy in terms of Darwin's barnacle example systematic introduction, it is not clear in so far as infinte divsion and infinite componentability (of any nanotech say) establishes or settles in ones mind that biodiversity interms of parralel lines rather than a net of direct chromosomal contiguity (this is hard to follow becuase it is in the style of Einstein's change from special to general relaivity qualititively and depends somewhat on what mutations essentailly are (or are not)) may be at least pragmatically more conducive to the tools of the parralell computer post information age of biological advance.

quote:

---

into a physical space that does not follow basic principles Einstein believed in that had him not taking Kant seriously?

---

goto my RElativity and the problem of space thread for there I document Einstein's postion here on this.

quote:

---

and this is done with the future of space exploration explictly in pedagogy?

---

I sense that people are not thinking in terms of future exploration when looking at what Einstein called "primative experiences". When I first read this phrase I thought he meant what a NEandrathal would experinece of an early greek such as Kant's "thales" but I now tend to think my first vision and understanding to be rather innocent.

quote:

---

there is the possiblity that specifying creation in this manner, both?, and any? use? (but not all? or every?) of scientific method results in? being able to re-read?; read further?.

---

quote:

---

PS... WHAT!?

---

Do you want an attempted reconstruction of these marks too? I only used the pretext that you included for this post. still havent figured this red out.[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 12-24-2002]{Fixed quote structure as best I could - Adminnemooseus}[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 12-25-2002]

I would like to have any confusion between biblical creationism and scintific creationism to be resolved in a quatification (of distributive c/e higher learning) of Newton's elastic and electric spririt but since this is SCIENCE not an ism of any ology, diacritically at most, I can not just because I wish you a Merry Christmas have it my way. I may not even be able to eat this a M-Ds or superzize the same etc.

Tenets of Creationism
Posted by Matt on January 7, 2003, 7:50 amPhony Tenets: YEC Andrews Admits that 'Scientific" Creationism is Unscientific - Kevin R. Henke January 7, 2003, 8:12 am
Re: Phony Tenets: YEC Andrews Admits that 'Scientific" Creationism is Unscientific - Brad McFall January 7, 2003, 11:07 am
GodK, if you view these few windows on the NO ANSWERS IN GENESIS web site then you will understand HOW it is that this "confusion" can arise. That is all I meant. I know much less theology than I would like.[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 01-06-2003]