Posted on 04/23/2010 6:41:29 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
Two? I guess they consider the head louse and body louse subspecies of Pediculus humanis. Pthirus pubis* isn’t extinct yet, albeit vastly reduced in numbers due to modern grooming practices.
*try saying that fast 3 times after a couple of drinks.
Okay, well you were either suggesting derision was in my post or you were not. So why don’t you figure out which way you want to go with it and then get back to me on that, capiche?
You are funny. You call something highly educated folks are doing in their field of expertise (which likely you don't share that same level of expertise) as 'just a guess', and then suggesting that your statement is a fact. But certainly no derision.
Are you good when folks dismiss Biblical creation as 'just a myth'?
Okay I retract the word ‘just’ from the statement, happy?
Okay I retract the word ‘just’ from the statement, happy?
<><><><><
Couldn’t care less. You’re just an anonymous poster on an internet forum.
A guess is still a guess, whether the person doing the speculating has a PhD hanging on his wall or not.
Could have fooled me. I'd have thought that someone who COULDN'T care less wouldn't bother commenting on it.
FWIW, THANK-YOU, THANK-YOU, THANK-YOU, for saying that you could NOT care less instead of that you *could care less*. That and *impacted* are two of my major grammatical pet peeves.
But dont you know?/sarc> “No dissent allowed”
But when you don't have any data that supports your useless model, I guess all you can do is deride the conclusions of those who DO have data to support a useful model.
Does this mean that if everyone runs around naked for a while lice would become extinct?
Thanks for checking in, metmom.
valkyry1 asked me a direct question, I thought it would be rude to ignore her.
I reserve my comments such as yours for those posters who come onto a thread and ask ‘who cares about xyz’?
But while I have you, how do you feel about folks who refer to Biblical creation as ‘just a myth’? Do you find it derisive?
A guess is still a guess, whether the person doing the speculating has a PhD hanging on his wall or not.
<><><><><><
Funny. Obviously what you say is also true, then, of all the religious scholars with their PhDs touting Biblical creationism. Their education makes no difference, ‘cuz a guess is still a guess. It’s not like they’ve got tangible, empirical evidence for Biblical creation.
I guess it comes down to what you are comfortable believing, and as you have suggested, one guess is likely as good as another. Whatever makes you happy, eh?
Who knew Christians were such relativists?
Red Herring alert MM.
Which was soon followed by the opening of "gentleman's' caves" where women would be paid to dance and take the clothes back off.
Females have a prominent sexual display front and center meant to evoke the rear view, a very common sexual display tactic among primates. And human females mate out of estrus, practically unheard of among any other species. And although we pair bond and are mostly monogamous, about 10% of children are born to a father outside the pair bond (but mommy doesn't say so).
Physically we are one of the most sexual animals, but we like to cover it up with clothes, culture, and tradition.
So YES. No doubt the first thing men thought of soon after their culture embraced the use of clothes was “Where do I go to see them take those clothes OFF!”
LOL!!!
Him.
Yes. And condescending to boot.
For some who claim that science is about best fits and nothing can ever be proved for certain, it’s hypocritical to make blanket statements about areas which science is incapable of commenting on.
In order for someone to say with certainty that the creation account is just a myth, one would have to know that as a fact and that simply is not possible. Nobody has that kind of breadth of knowledge to be able to definitively state that and science is incapable of determining that. The best they can truthfully say is that the creation account as presented in Scripture doesn’t line up with the current scientific interpretation of the evidence. Any more than that is way out of their league.
So it’s just an opinion with no basis stated as fact. Very unscientific of those who pride themselves on things like objectivity, precision, and accuracy.
However, it is very revealing about the person stating it and says way more about their position and worldview than about anything else they have to say whether they realize it or not.
FWIW, do I mind it when people say that?
No.
I don’t expect any different from those who don’t believe in God or the veracity of Scripture. It’s hardly a surprise to hear that opinion. As a matter of fact, I would hazard a guess that believing it was/is a myth is the more prevalent opinion.
And it still doesn’t faze me.
Considering that I don’t see one’s opinion or viewpoint or belief or whatever you wish to call it, on the creation account or the ToE as relevant to one’s ability to either be a Christian, or to practice (perform?) science and use the scientific method, yeah.
Considering that I don’t see one’s opinion or viewpoint or belief or whatever you wish to call it, on the creation account or the ToE as relevant to one’s ability to either be a Christian
<><><>
good for you, and I mean that sincerely. There are certainly some here who are, uh, less open to such a notion.
Him.
<><><><>
Whoops. Sorry valk.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.