Oh dear, I can't help myself... On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 Justin Findlay wrote: >On Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 09:39:57PM -0600, Nathan Rackliffe wrote: >> On Fri, 2004-04-16 at 18:42, Carl Youngblood wrote: >> However, I find the most interesting >> parts of the list are the ones marked OT. :) I also like the rigor we >> are placing on the question (let's find sources, etc.) and the many >> interesting tangents that we can take by looking at the gospel through >> the glasses of FLOSS. > >Um, if you were referring to my post about being bored by the recent veins on this >list, it was a joke. Oh, dear, this is too fun. (-: > >Justin > >-- >I am the very model of a modern Major-General, >I've information vegetable, animal, and mineral, >I know the kings of England, and I quote the fights historical >>From Marathon to Waterloo, in order categorical; >I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical, >I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical, >About binomial theorem I'm teeming with a lot o' news, >With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse.
(Animaniacs) I am the very model of a cartoon individual My animation's comical, unusual, and whimsical, I'm quite adept at funny gags, comedic theory I have read. >From wicked puns and stupid jokes to anvils I drop on your head. I'm very good at fancy dances, I can even piroette, Then smack the villain with a fish, I know my cartoon ettiquette. I make make my face all mean and really give you quite a fright, Then make up with flowers made of real exploding dynomite, dynoMITE!! By the way, I think science is definitely lacking in completeness because of the emphasis scientists place on the physical. The scientific method is completely physical, except the first "hypothesis" part. That goes on gut feeling, which can be based on impression or experience. Anyway, scientists (in their research) tend to leave out the whole realm of the spiritual. (It's considered metaphysical, or as my prof called it, "bad science.") That's like, at least HALF of the story that they're leaving out! It's an easy mistake to make, since not many of us can see the spiritual, the concourses of angels (or devils) that may be surrounding us (probably cuz we'd just pee our pants). I suppose it's not so easy to make a spiritual measurement, to collapse a spiritual wavefunction. We do as best we can as scientists to come up with physical laws that govern the universe... and we learn about the spiritual laws upon which all blessings are predicated in Sunday school... To me, science just supplements the doctrine. Did God create the universe in a big bang? At the moment, the data points to a "yes," but His ways are not my ways, His thoughts are not my thoughts, but it's not wrong to ponder about how creation started. MAYBE that's how it was or maybe we are WAY off. Hee hee, I was dicussing this same thing with a friend and I think we were talking about how we'll be able to comprehend everything at some point or be able to ask God, if we're good... anyway, I said, "I'll ask about what the dinosaurs had to do with anything." and he said, "And more importantly, when do I get to ride one?" Man, does he know how to ask the right questions or what? I guess that's why he's at Caltech (not that I envy his situation in the slightest). Just a thought, or three, -Danelle P.S. Oh yeah, having had taken some classes from FARMS professors, I think they know quite a bit in their fields and do some pretty good research. Bro. Gee and Bro. Parry are fine minds of our time. Let it be known. But it's true that the evidence will always be vague or incomplete. But these guys aren't trying to prove the validity of the church, they have an interest in studying these things out and trying to make sense of them, reconstructing a huge puzzle that is human history. But I doubt that what they do is bunk, so it makes me angry when some of you are saying that without providing some evidence to back up your disgruntled-ness. True, I was a little bugged when our Old Testament manual had that famous picture of an (albeit apostate or pagan) altar on it (one that definitely had stone that had been cut by the hand of man, clearly not following the commandment of the Lord). I made sure to point this out in O.T. class and we all had a good laugh. Pretty blatant mistake, though. But I guess aestetics wins over truth, or a good-looking cover sells more books? (Blame it on marketing.) ____________________________________________________________ Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10 ____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
