Re: Two connected evidences
- --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
"Todd Greene" <greeneto@...> wrote, in part:
> Two specific examples of this I'm familiarI also have a little personal familiarity with those two examples, the history of which is contained in our archives here.
> with (personal history) is when Apologetics
> Press quietly deleted their moon dust argument
> for the moon being young, and their promotion
> of the "fishing reel in stone" hoax.
At least Peter J. Reilly gives me a little "honor where honor is due"!
Bill O'Reilly Likes Wealth Tax Idea Even Less Than I Do
By Peter J. Reilly
December 1, 2012
You will note that Mr. O'Reilly indicates that "Greeeeeen" Party candidate Jill
Stein approves of a wealth tax, illustrating the point with a brief clip of
Doctor Stein discussing the wealth tax.
"Cousin Bill" used my interview with Doctor Stein without crediting me. That
really doesn't bother me very much. I am always ready to help out a probable
relative, but it is very troubling that he did not give any credit to Interlock
Media. The crew from Interlock was an integral part of my first foray into the
Thanks To Bob Baty
I don't watch the O'Reilly Factor but my most reliable commenter Robert Baty, a
retired IRS appeals officer, does. He noted the Jill Stein clip and let me know
- Hey, Todd, I was hoping you would drop by! Now that I have
a decent internet connection I see you've been busy elsewhere.
(I hope you like my dog.)
> Well, to be honest, he's fighting a lost battle.Well, yeah, but in that context I wasn't speaking strictly of
> Lost over two hundred years ago. ;-)
geology... I was thinking more along the lines of Acts 5:39.
Are you familiar with the book I linked in that last message?
Title: History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom
Author: Andrew Dickson White
There's some pretty good stuff in it, including a chapter on
astronomy. As I understand it, White's method of "conflict
thesis" is rather outdated in terms of historiography -- but
then again, so is creationism itself. It's pretty amazing to
see all these same excuses from the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries
still parading around the internet as modern creation science.
Here's something from Chapter 7, about archaeology:
| In the last years of the sixteenth century Michael Mercati
| tried to prove that the "thunder-stones" were weapons or
| implements of early races of men; but from some cause his
| book was not published until the following century, when
| other thinkers had begun to take up the same idea, and
| then it had to contend with a theory far more accordant
| with theologic modes of reasoning in science. This was
| the theory of the learned Tollius, who in 1649 told the
| world that these chipped or smoothed stones were
| "generated in the sky by a fulgurous exhalation conglobed
| in a cloud by the circumposed humour."
| But about the beginning of the eighteenth century a fact
| of great importance was quietly established. In the year
| 1715 a large pointed weapon of black flint was found in
| contact with the bones of an elephant, in a gravel bed near
| Gray's Inn Lane, in London. The world in general paid no
| heed to this: if the attention of theologians was called
| to it, they dismissed it summarily with a reference to the
| Deluge of Noah; but the specimen was labelled, the
| circumstances regarding it were recorded, and both specimen
| and record carefully preserved.
Uh oh. I can see where *this* is going...
"Conglobed in a cloud by the circumposed humour" is pretty
humorous in itself!
And this book was published in 1896 -- the year radioactivity
Worldwide Church of Latitudinarianism