Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [M & B] Gil Yoder's evolution falsification!

Expand Messages
  • cassondrawrites@aol.com
    I find these rhetorical arguments exhausting in their convoluted and earnest avoidance of common sense. Without commenting on the argument itself, I can say
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 4, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      I find these rhetorical arguments exhausting in their convoluted and earnest
      avoidance of common sense. Without commenting on the argument itself, I can
      say this: I have listened to and read a great many scientists, teachers, etc.,
      discussing the now-apparent close relationship between dinosaurs and birds,
      and the tone has been one of wonder and excitement rather than dismay and shock
      that the entire evolutionary theory has now crumbled. So I doubt if the way
      to disproving evolution as creator lies in the implications of this particular
      argument about a reptile and a bird.

      Just a thought...if the lack of an expected close relationship between
      certain species could disprove evolutionary theory, then does the proven existence
      of other close relationships among different species support evolutionary
      theory? After all, the fact that one relationship differed from the expected does
      not explain away the hundreds of other relationships that *have* been found.
      Amino acids just aren't where my faith hangs its hat.

      Cassondra


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.