levolution teaching

Nigel Venters venters at interalpha.co.uk
Sun Aug 22 11:13:09 EDT 1999


Jim,
Well said! Especially when all the discussion (On either side) is based on
"Potted" ideas from others who are just being followed by weak willed
individuals who can't think for themselves!
Nigel

Jim Taylor <1_iron at email.msn.com> wrote in article
<00c401beebc1$b97c5020$41870a3f at kylepsoc>...
> List:
> 
> I should like to UNSUBSCRIBE from the Darwin/Genesis discussion group and
> SUBSCRIBE again to the LEPS-L.
> 
> Jim Taylor
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Semjase <semjase at aol.com>
> To: <leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
> Sent: Friday, August 20, 1999 11:20 AM
> Subject: Re: levolution teaching
> 
> 
> >
> > >From: Neil at NWJONES.DEMON.CO.UK  (Neil Jones)
> > >Date: Thu, 19 August 1999 04:42 PM EDT
> > >Message-id: <14767 at nwjones.demon.co.uk>>
> >
> >
> >
> > > The evidence is patent nonsense.
> > >
> > >The biblical account of creation IS NOT compatable with science.
> > >ALL the so called scientific evidence has been demonstrated
conclusively
> > >to be invalid or even fraudulent. Just because someone has initials
> > >after their name doesn't mean they should be believed.
> > >
> >
> > >Creation Science is, as I have said before, a FRAUD. It is not science
> > >at all but Hebrew Mythology in mascarade. If you are to give a
balanced
> > >view why not that of Norse Mythology or Greek Mythology or Egyptian
> > >or Sumerian Mythology?
> >
> > Actually Mythology can be based on factual happenings.  I agree a
broader
> view
> > as you suggest should be given.
> >
> >  The only difference is that some people still
> > >believe that the primitive tribal stories of the ancient Hebrews are
> > >literally true. There are a lot of people who believe this and you
> > >might even say that there is one born every minute. This does not
> > >make it good science. Science is based on a logical system of
> > >proof, mythologies are not.
> >
> > One must remember there is a difference between mythology and religion.
> No one
> > is expected to believe a myth.  A religious belief is on faith alone
> (usually).
> >  A scientific belief is by  proof based on observed fact.
> >
> > In both cases of religion and science there are belifs present and
these
> may or
> > may not be factual in an ultimate sense.
> > >
> > >If Creationism is a science. What discovered facts have caused the
> > >creed it promotes to change? Or if there aren't any what facts if
> > >they were discovered could cause it to change?
> > >
> > >If there any feature of creationism that is subject to scientific
test?
> >
> > Creationism regarding certain christian sects can only be a religion. 
But
> have
> > we actually defined "Creationism" as pertains this discussion.
> > >
> > >Why do some christians belive in evolution?
> >
> > Biblical account is rather diffuse on the creation of the world.  It
says
> God
> > created the world but not how it was done.  It should be noted that
> creation
> > encloses the concept of time.  Therefore time was one of the things
being
> > created. If this is so it may be impossible to find the exact point in
> time
> > when creation came into being as time itself was being created.  This
may
> have
> > enormous implications regarding the structure of this system of
reality.
> Since
> > it appears that the present is the only place things seem to be formed
it
> > appears that creation may occur in the ever present now.
> > It is an ongoing process that every component of creation participates
in.
> > Separating creation from God may well be impossible as well.  The true
> nature
> > of these things may well be beyond present human abilities to
understand
> > >
> > >(If I recall correctly Charles Darwin himself had a degree in
Theology.)
> > >0
> > >
> > >If creationism is correct. Biological theory is wrong. Cosmological
> > >Theory is wrong. Quantum mechanics theory is wrong. Geological theory
is
> > >wrong.
> >
> > This only depends on what particular view point you take. Since the
> creation
> > involves and covers all these things the basis for them was obviously
> created.
> > Okay you say it wasn't created?  Why is it here then, something must
have
> > caused it to happen.
> > >
> > >>From my point of view on the other side of the
> > >Atlantic "Creation Science" is another whacky American idea.
> >
> > American?
> >
> >  Rather like
> > >the ideas of the people who believe that The United Nations is
planning
> > >to subjugate the population and is spying on them from black
helicopters.
> >
> > Okay, has anyone spotted suspicious looking black helicopters?  This is
> for a
> > conspiracy newsgroup for sure!  Actually it is being done by
genetically
> > engineered black butterflies & moths.   WATCH OUT!
> > >
> > >
> > >--
> > >Neil Jones
> >
> >
> > S.
> >
> 
> 
> 


More information about the Leps-l mailing list