Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AndrewC

I agree that these appear to be produced by humans, but I would be curious why you think you don't know the history. I think if you saw any painting or depiction you would infer a history. But there are cases where you might be wrong. There are certainly natural phenomena that resemble carved figures. There are certainly objects that are argued about.

What is the objective method used to make the determination?


727 posted on 02/24/2005 4:07:47 AM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 722 | View Replies ]


To: js1138; AndrewC

What about the appearance of the face of Jesus or Mary that no one drew on a building, rock etc.? How does Andrew tell whether someone drew those or not?

What about the face of Jesus on that pancake that was sold on Ebay?


730 posted on 02/24/2005 5:06:45 AM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 727 | View Replies ]

To: js1138

"What is the objective method used to make the determination?" Since cavemen drew monkeys, it is obvious they were still there after humans were designed. So, evolution is false.


733 posted on 02/24/2005 5:16:07 AM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 727 | View Replies ]

To: js1138
I think if you saw any painting or depiction you would infer a history.

Well, anything not directly observed about the "painting" would of necessity be inferred.

The fact that you would class it a "painting" infers a judgement on your part.

765 posted on 02/24/2005 4:19:49 PM PST by AndrewC (Darwinian logic -- It is just-so if it is just-so)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 727 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson