Replies

My point was this, The last half of the post that you so cavalirly blew off as childs play.

If evolution is true, therefore creationism is false, if creationism is false, gensis is then questionable, if genesis is questionable, then what else in the bible is questionable? It proves that the bible is NOT perfect as fundamentalists claim.

Perfectly logical progression, and explains why fundamentalist MUST fight any theory that disproves creationism and gensis.

Nothing childlike about it.

And yes, the NOT being removed was a veiled insult, only because your response to me was one as well.

To: whattajoke

waj ...

It is my strong contention that science, and all its tenets, is an important part of conservatism. We consider ourselves more knowledgable and educated (well, we are) and this is all part of that. The minority of YEC's in our world do us an injustice, and make for easy ridicule from the left.

ph ...

Well stated. That is also my position.

112 posted on 04/29/2003 3:00 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)

fC ...

Overlordism ...

I'm only surprised that you publicly admit it (( you 're not joshing // tricking me ? ? )) !

"We consider ourselves more knowledgable and educated (well, we are)" ---

fC ...

Is that only what your worried about ... what leftist think ---

"The minority of YEC's in our world do us an injustice, and make for easy ridicule from the left."

What's the difference between your village and hillary clinton's ?

wj ...

As has been stated here a million times, scientific debate is not meant for public spectacle. Truth be told, it's a tedious, boring exercise detailing minute facts, written out over tens of thousands of pages in hundreds of texts, journals, online resources, museum placards, etc.

fC ...

classic ... elitisim !

To: f.Christian

fC...

Originally the word liberal meant social conservatives(no govt religion--none) who advocated growth and progress---mostly technological(knowledge being absolute/unchanging)based on law--reality... UNDER GOD---the nature of GOD/man/govt. does not change.

LC...

Now I follow, thank you. Actually, I don't disagree with this at all since I see the left as abandoning the uncertianty of democracy and majority rule (( constitutional // law ))** for the assurance technocracy and expert rule (( dictatorship // tyranny ))**.

152 posted on 9/10/02 12:17 PM Pacific by Liberal Classic

** .. .. .. my additions !

Boshevik monopoly (( experts )) ... social // mind engineers ---

Brainwashing (( God // Truth )) -- Indoctrination (( lies // evolution // atheism )) !

Main Entry: tech·no·crat
Pronunciation: 'tek-n&-"krat
Function: noun
Date: 1932
1 : an adherent of technocracy
2 : a technical expert; especially : one exercising managerial authority

Main Entry: tech·noc·ra·cy
Pronunciation: tek-'nä-kr&-sE
Function: noun
Date: circa 1919
: government by technicians; specifically : management of society by technical experts

"And yes, the NOT being removed was a veiled insult, only because your response to me was one as well. "

Touche.

Regarding the rest of your post. Evolution means an infinite number of things to people. The word, as used on these threads is like a piece of warm jello, regarding definition.

I firmly accept the concept of micro evolution. The subtleties of evolutionary thinking sometimes are easily acceptable to someone who believes the Bible account of creation, and sometimes not.

One of the more interesting things in the Bible is the mention of the Behemouth and the Leviathon. Both are spoken of as though the contemporary reader had experience with them. Modern scholars have attempted to call them Elephants and Hippos, or aligators. All are preposterous. But the other explanations don't make sense, based on the world view that the same animals that exist today were all that was around then.

We don't know ANYTHING for sure about evolution. Not "evolutionists" or "creationists." And both sides are guilty of the exact same sins. I normally don't participate in these threads because they are exercises in futility from both sides, and both sides can get pretty disrespectful.

You cought me in my "insult." As a matter of fact, I thought long and hard before I hit the post button, and decided I was spending too much time on a minor decision. So you got what you got.

I will put "in a nutshell" my basic attitude about this whole thing: It is an argument between two different religious beliefs. At least one side admits it.