<< As I've noted, I am just a messenger here. >>
Unfortunately, you have a paper trail that completely refutes that claim. A mesenger just delivers the message; he doesn't make claims about facts related to the message -- nor does he interject his own opinion. You have claimed, several times, that the "information" in the "message" disproves the "millions of years." You are not just a messenger; you are an advocate, and you have used this issue several times in your advocacy.
It is beyond my ability to understand -- here in a religion thread -- that someone touting religion so loudly as you would behave in this manner so blatantly, and not expect it to be noticed. If I were to come into a discussion of biblical teaching, and post a link to some "news article" questioning your interpretation of a particular doctrine -- and making personal comments that make it obvious I am relying on the "truth" of that article -- and using that article to "refute" your claims -- and then if youm, rightly, were to point out the obvious error in the article that makes it clear that both the article and *I* were misstating the actual facts -- you would not for one minute allow me to try to slough it off with "I am just the messenger."
I would say some things about Christian integrity here -- but I've said them all before, and all it gets me is more vicious abuse from the very people claiming the moral high ground. As the King of Siam said to Anna: 'Tis a puzzlement. I would just ask: Do you really believe this is the kind of behavior taught in scripture?
<< If you can do that and if they agree with you and publically retract the story in question,
then let me know about it and I will cease all mention of it. >>
So -- even though you have access to the truth -- even though we have shown that the articles are erroneous -- even though we have pointed you to the actual evidence that the articles are wrong -- you are going to "stick to the story" unless the media admits their error? Again -- what if this were some lie told about President Bush and parroted all over the place by the left-wing-loonies? Would you accept that kind of excuse from them? I don't think so. By this standard -- it is perfectly reasonable for the lefties to continue to tout the "fake but accurate" National Guard memos -- since both Dan Rather and Mary Mapes still say they are telling the truth about them. It doesn't matter -- by your own standard -- that they have been totally discredited by the real facts; all that matters is that they have not retracted their claims as false.
You know -- hypocrisy is condemning behavior in others that one is deliberately engaging in himself. Hypocrisy is addressed pretty directly in scripture. If you have ever condemned this kind of behavior in the left-wing loonies -- your behavior concerning this issue perfectly epitomizes hypocrisy.
This is not a personal attack -- it is the only logical conclusion that I see possible -- and it gives me no pleasure to have to say so. Please give serious consideration to what this behavior does to your Christian testimony.
Like I say, the pictures are unambiguous and so is the report from MSNBC and Reuters. The only thing in the whole picture which is ambiguous are the motives of the people trying to make something opposite of what the evidence indicates out of the story.