You're right. Time for a nap.
Posted on 07/11/2002 9:44:50 AM PDT by ZGuy
The prominent magazine Scientific American thought it had finally discredited its nemesis—creationism—with a feature article listing ‘15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense’ (July 2002). Supposedly these were the fifteen best arguments that evolutionists could use to discredit the Bible’s account of Creation. (National Geographic TV also devoted a lengthy report to the article.)
Within 72 hours, Dr Jonathan Sarfati—a resident scientist at Answers in Genesis–Australia—had written a comprehensive, point-by-point critique of the magazine article and posted it on this Web site.
So Scientific American thought it would try to silence AiG with the threat of a lawsuit.
In an e-mail to Dr Sarfati, Scientific American accused him and AiG of infringing their copyright by reproducing the text of their article and an illustration. They said they were prepared to ‘settle the matter amicably’ provided that AiG immediately remove Dr Sarfati’s article from its Web site.
AiG’s international copyright attorney, however, informed Scientific American that their accusations are groundless and that AiG would not be removing the article. Dr Sarfati’s article had used an illustration of a bacterial flagellum, but it was drawn by an AiG artist years ago. AiG had also used the text of SA’s article, but in a way that is permissible under ‘fair use’ of copyrighted materials for public commentary. (AiG presented the text of the SA article, with Dr Sarfati’s comments interspersed in a different color, to avoid any accusations of misquoting or misrepresenting the author.)
Why the heavy-handed tactics? If AiG’s responses were not valid, why would Scientific American even care whether they remained in the public arena? One can only presume that Scientific American (and National Geographic) had the ‘wind taken out of their sails.’ Dr Sarfati convincingly showed that they offered nothing new to the debate and they displayed a glaring ignorance of creationist arguments. Their legal maneuver appears to be an act of desperation. (AiG is still awaiting SA’s response to the decision not to pull the Web rebuttal.)
Creation/God...Christianity---secular-govt.-humanism/SCIENCE!
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. These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values(private/personal) GROWTH!
You're right. Time for a nap.
According to the Gospels, JESUS believed that Adam and Eve were real, actual people who were created just the way they were portrayed in the Genesis account. Jesus believed that Jonah was in the big fish, etc etc etc. Jesus totally accepted the Old Testament accounts as being a literal intrepretation of the truthful, inerrant word of God. Was Jesus a liar? Was He stupid? Misinformed? Ignorant?
I see that you just proved my point in the top paragraph.
If you think Adam & Eve were the first humans & lived in some magical place called "the Garden of Eden" that's your business. I'd just appreciate it if people kept such mythology out of science class.
You didn't come within a tousand feet of answering the simple questions I posed to you. Care to try again?
Then came the post-modern age of switch-flip-spin-DEFORMITY-cancer...Atheist secular materialists through ATHEISM/evolution CHANGED-REMOVED the foundations...demolished the wall(separation of state/religion)--trampled the TRUTH-GOD...built a satanic temple/SWAMP-MALARIA/RELIGION(cult of darwin-marx-satan) over them---made these absolutes subordinate--relative and calling/CHANGING all the... residuals---technology/science === evolution to substantiate/justify their efforts--claims...social engineering--PC--atheism...anti-God/Truth RELIGION--and declared a crusade/WAR--JIHAD--INTOLERANCE/TYRANNY...against God--man--society/SCIENCE!!
Changing--morphing words-meaning-reality...
the CONSTITUTION/history via your 'logic-reason' to your fantasy-bias world-bs/IDEOLOGY---LIBERALISM/EVOLUTION is called psychosis(DENIAL)!
Do you agree that species evolve to adapt to their environment every day around us?
I agree with maxwell. Time to call it a day. Thanks for the civil crossfire.
I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off.
So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!"
"Why shouldn't I?" he said.
I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"
He said, "Like what?"
I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?"
He said, "Religious."
I said, "Me too! Are you christian or buddhist?"
He said, "Christian."
I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?"
He said, "Protestant."
I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?"
He said, "Baptist!"
I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?"
He said, "Baptist church of god!"
I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?"
He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!"
I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?"
He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!"
I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off.
-- Emo Phillips
I don't understand the point you're trying to communicate in that post.
Do you agree that species evolve to adapt to changing environments?
It was in reply to one in which i was asked if I had some sort of reality distortion disorder.
Why you believe that you can bullyrag me into some sort of repeat of the Reformation is beyond me. The body of Catholic dogma is on line. If you're sincere, go study it.
I like this thought very much.
I'm not a Christian, but agnostic.
I have no problem with the possibility that evolution is just God's method or system of tinkering with life.
Do YOU believe God revealed the truth in the Gospels? If so, then why do you believe God did NOT reveal the truth in the Old Testament? Why do YOU belive that the Holy Spirit told the truth to Matthew Mark Luke and John -- but that the Holy Spirit lied to Moses?
Simple question.
EBUCK
All your above statements seem to indicate you do . . .
Yet you hesitate to answer the question.
Interesting.
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.