Re: Petroglyphs again: Ken Ham today & Ockham's razor!
Thanks for offering up a rebuttal to Ken Ham's rebuttal regarding the petroglyph.
I may have more to say later, but I wanted to quickly note the following:
I wrote, in part:
> Dinosaur 1 at Kachina Bridge isYou were more exacting and noted:
> best explained as a dinosaur.
>> Ken Ham
> This was written by Ishmael Abrahams,For what it's worth, I have had the habit recently of ascribing to Ken Ham that which he posts approvingly.
> not Ken Ham. Here is a detailed response
> to Abrahams' diatribe.
>> Todd Greene
- --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, "Todd Greene" <greeneto@...> wrote, in his closing remarks:
> ...most people won't even deal with youngWhile there are many examples where the above is played out in "relative" degree, my mind was turned to Goldsmith and his most recent demonstrations in proof of the above observations by Todd.
> earth creationists and their
>> obstinate nonsense.
> You have to wade through reams of irrelevant
> and so on - and you're typically dealing
> with people who are
>> utterly close-minded,
>> who have less than zero intention
>> of changing anything they think
>> based on actual, good evidence,
>> based on genuine science,
>> people who have every intention
>> of continuing to believe what
>> they believe, and
>> pushing bogus claims and
>> using fallacious arguments,
> no matter what the facts are.
Longsuffering that I am, however, I am going to wait a little longer in hopes that "Mark" will reappear and take up where I left off trying to help him get started with the lead he seemed so desperate to take.