Posted on 10/06/2002 8:16:21 AM PDT by hispanarepublicana
I must have missed something (very possible) somewhere. To what are you referring in your post to VR? Or, what is the significance or story behind that pic?
More to the point, should one that equates Darwinian "evidence" with mathematical "proof" be believed?
[Professor Michael Dini's position] Sounds reasonable to me.
Yes. If you were a math teacher, would you recommend someone for further math studies if he didn't truly believe that 2+2 = 4?
Why is it important for a physician to 'believe' in Evolution? Its an unprovable hypothesis that has nothing to do with the quality of medical care that the prospective doctor can provide. If anything a stronger case can be made that someone who believes you are just another dumb animal, is not going to quite offer the same care as someone who sees you - warts and all - as being created in the image of the Holy God.
Sir Issac Newton believed in a young earth creation. As did Faraday, Hoyle, and others. I guess their accomplishments shrink when compared with those of evolutionist giants such as Carl Sagan, Huxley, Dewey, Hitler, and others.
We are blessed in this country to have the freedom to worship as we will, and you, and the other members of your faith based religon, are free to believe in the 'goo to you' dogma; but I (and others) don't...
as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.
Seek ye the Lord while He may be found. Call ye upon Him while He is near.
Those are the "fossil bones" of a mesonychid. Not too long ago the paleontologists had a carefully plotted linkage from those bones to Flipper. Then real science stepped in and provided overwhelming evidence that whales and hippos are kissing cousins. That left the flustered bone-pickers rather speechless for a fraction of second. Science being what it is, something had to give, not the theory, but the evidence was changed. Things that were huggably close to the mesonychid have stepped a small distance away. The predictions have been forgotten and have not been counted against the theory. The theory remains intact unmarred by the "changed" evidence. Thus my attributing "Paleontologists suck as paleontologists".
Evolutionary theory simply doesn't enjoy the same relevance to clinical applications of biology.
Well, aren't you the sage? Mind telling me what you think you know now?
Before you ask, I told Blues Brother #2 to continue to address me through the "Report Abuse" button per his recent practice.
I remember seeing something about that. Still, I'm not gettin' in the middle of your tiff! I think you guys should either shake hands or put the gloves on. I prefer the former.
And who was it that brought up a tiff? I explained the meaning of the fossil bones picture, mentioning no person.
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.
