Based upon my first statement, I needed to qualify myself.
>There is no need to construct arguments to dispute Biblical literalists.
>
>Any reasonable person can do it in a matter of seconds.
>
>On 2/13/07, Russel Madere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
~~
There is no need to construct arguments to dispute Biblical literalists.
Any reasonable person can do it in a matter of seconds.
On 2/13/07, Russel Madere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am very religious and believe the same thing. Additionally, Pope John
> Paul II stated that this belief is n
What does it say about me that I left science and became a developer. I'm not
sure I really passed my san roll in college. And the changes to IT in the past
5 years have made that even more onvious.
>On 2/12/07, Russel Madere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I take it you have little experienc
I am very religious and believe the same thing. Additionally, Pope John Paul
II stated that this belief is not incompatible with Roman Catholic Dogma.
>Myself, I'm at least somewhat religious, and I like to think that the 7 days
>God took to create the world was actually billions of years.
We a
On 2/12/07, Russel Madere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I disagree. To take the Book of Genesis as a literal history of the world
> is as bad as believing
Myself, I'm at least somewhat religious, and I like to think that the 7 days
God took to create the world was actually billions of years.
W
On 2/12/07, Russel Madere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I take it you have little experience with this sort. Paleotologist are
> all a little nuts to begin with. They found me to be too crazy, so I was
> sent to the Geophysicists.
>
My experience is that most hard core scientists are a little w
I disagree. To take the Book of Genesis as a literal history of the world is
as bad as believing that Jesus was of western european descent as some believe
(c.f. the Glastonbury Abbey mythos). A literal translation of all of the bible
has been used to justify most of the human atrocities over
Creationism and ID are bunk as a SCIENCE.
They are perfectly wonderful as an element of Faith.
On 2/12/07, Russel Madere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You might want to look at this paper:
>
> http://nagt.org/files/nagt/jge/abstracts/Ross_v53n3p319.pdf
>
> It is an interesting read. I do, howev
You might want to look at this paper:
http://nagt.org/files/nagt/jge/abstracts/Ross_v53n3p319.pdf
It is an interesting read. I do, however, think creationism and ID is bunk. I
also think that the fundamentalist/evangalical movement of Chrisitanity is
based on religious heresy. But that is my
I take it you have little experience with this sort. Paleotologist are all a
little nuts to begin with. They found me to be too crazy, so I was sent to the
Geophysicists.
Some feel it is a sin not to look at the science. Most move beyond this
eventually and accept the truth. Some just stay
I dunno Will, haven't made up my mind.
It's actually more disturbing to me that someone can do such convincing
scientific work, and then at the end of the day, flush it all down the
toilet in favor of their mythological beliefs. I mean, what is the value of
attaining knowledge of your world, if yo
No. But that is why I suggested he be introduced to Roman Catholisism.
I knew several people who were creationist who studied Paleontology at UNO. I
had many glorious arguements with them and usually won. One even stated he
thought the "false" geologic record was put there by God for us to st
I disagree that that is hypocrisy.
I've had to write papers on English, history, and geology that cater to what
the prof wanted. By using their arguments, laid out cogently, well written,
and completely wrong.
Haven't you?
On 2/12/07, Rick Root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> He believes that the
He believes that the earth is only 10,000 years old. Fine, I can deal with
people who refute science in order to believe that. I don't agree, but
whatever.
However, this guy believes the earth is 10,000 years old, and writes a
dissertation that goes completly against his beliefs.
He calls it a
The dissonance between his paper and his stated beliefs don't raise an
alarm to you?
> Fascinating (to me anyway) article about a young-earth creationist, who
> nevertheless produced a dissertation in paleontology that was scientifically
> sound, and which refutes many of his religious beliefs.
>
Very interesting. Someone should introduce him to Roman Catholic Theology and
Eschatology.
I would be interested in reading this disertation. Mosasaurs are very
intersting critters. I have found a few fragments of thier bones in lag
deposits in the Selma chalks in Alabama. One find led to a
Fascinating (to me anyway) article about a young-earth creationist, who
nevertheless produced a dissertation in paleontology that was scientifically
sound, and which refutes many of his religious beliefs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/12/science/12geologist.html
I thought the University of Kansa
17 matches
Mail list logo
