Evolution vs. Creation Debate in Tucson, Arizona May 10

Calvery Chapel Tucson and Fellowship of Christian Athletes ^ | May 10, 2003 | Fellowship of Christian Athletes

[\/\/ayne]

Click on the image below for a PDF flyer



click here to get Adobe Acrobat Reader which reads PDF files

Saturday May 10, 2003

All Saturday meetings except the debate will be held at Calvary Tucson’s East Campus 8725 E. Speedway Blvd.

9:00 AM “Origins of Life and the Universe” . . . . .Hank Giesecke

10:00 AM “Fifty Facts Why Evolution Doesn’t Work” . . . .Russell Miller

11:00 AM Lunch

1:00 PM “Age of the Earth, and Intelligent Design” . . . .Hank Hiesecke

2:00 PM “Data from Mt. Saint Helens” . . . . .Russell Miller

3:00 PM Break

4:30 PM Dinner available at U of A’s McKale Center

6:00 PM Debate at University of Arizona McKale Center “Alternative World Views: Evolution and Creation”
Dr. Duane Gish and Professor Peter Sherman

Sunday May 11, 2003
Calvary Tucson East Campus
8:00 and 10:20 AM “Take Creation Captive”.......Hank Giesecke

Calvary Tucson West Campus
9:10 and 11:30 AM “Creation or Chaos”......Dr. John Meyer

Calvary Tucson East Campus
6:00 PM “Why 600 Scientists Reject Evolution” ......Dr. John Meyer

[The_Reader_David]

I'm not sure. I think one could still have a true market in which the individual pricing decisions were deterministic: replace each trader with a computer programmed to make pricing decisions according to a deterministic algorithm implementing the kind of heuristics traders actually use (each with a slightly different algorithm). I don't think that doing this would disturb the dynamics of the market, and absent knowing what all the algorithms are, would still leave the best model (for options at least) as Black-Scholes, complete with its stochastic element.

At least someone took the question seriously. DoctorStochastic decided I was being rude and evasive rather than making a rhetorical point. He seems to have not absorbed the point of my original post, that stochastic elements in a theory do not banish purposeful intent from the process being described, as the loudest polemicists on either side of the public debate seem to believe.

[The_Reader_David]

Ah, I see biblewonk doesn't believe in Sir John Eccles notion of emergent phenomena. How odd for some one with a screen name suggesting protestant piety to embrace materialistic reductionism!

[<1/1,000,000th%]

You are not the fellow down the hall from me in my department who regularly debates on behalf of "Individuals for Freethought" are you?

LOL!

If I am, you're in a lot of trouble. My daughter's bedrooms are down the hall from me.

[Virginia-American]

...valid point that Hitler was an evolutionist...

Are you claiming that AH thought that Jews, Negroes, Slavs and Aryans had a common ancestor?!

[Aric2000]

and an AH placemarker for me

[PatrickHenry]

AH was a creationist. Not that it matters all that much.

[Condorman]

[The poster in blue] is trying very much to promote thinking, not feeling, rationality not emotions on this thread.

That would be a first...