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

Re: [creationevolutiondebate] Re: Brian..Intuition versus Science

Expand Messages
  • Susan B. Cogan
    ... Nutrition is a brand new science that everyone is very interested in. What you are seeing there is the very ordinary process of science in which people
    Message 1 of 271 , Dec 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      At 04:42 AM 12/01/2001 +0000, you wrote:
      >Steve:
      >
      >Science has flip flopped on what issues, precisely?
      >
      >By 'flip flop', do you mean that some members of the community had
      >something different to say, or do you mean that they simply changed
      >their mind? Science has no more flip flopped on scientific theories
      >than theism has flip flopped (in the form of COUNTLESS SECTS) on holy
      >theories.
      >
      >-------------
      >
      >DAVE: Hasn't this happened in the area of nutrition. But that doesn't make
      >a very strong point. Aristotle was great biologist but science moves
      >on. What seemed like an established fact in his generation was shown
      >to be false by future scientists.

      Nutrition is a brand new science that everyone is very interested in. What
      you are seeing there is the very ordinary process of science in which
      people argue, do further study and get proved wrong, come at a problem in a
      different way and find out new information, and so forth. Scientists have
      been doing the very same to Darwin's theory for generations. The Theory of
      Evolution has been refined, augmented, and in a few cases changed--which is
      fine, it is the truth everyone is after. That's how science works. Science
      pursues the truth in any direction it can at any cost. The cost, in the
      case of evolution, is a literal reading of the first two books of the Old
      Testament. Since the Middle Ages Christians have tried to insist that
      Christianity and all its beliefs are true in the scientific sense. They are
      not. The idea that Genesis is science is something that you and your
      co-religionists are going to have to let go of. If you don't, then you are
      probably participating in a dying religion.

      Susan
    • Dave Oldridge
      ... I suppose you are now using this as an excuse to continue to avoid repentance. Typical of you God-haters, Tim. Dave Oldridge ICQ 1800667
      Message 271 of 271 , Dec 9, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        On 7 Dec 2001 at 14:51, LAlbert wrote:

        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: Tim Clifton
        > To: creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:42 AM
        > Subject: Re: [creationevolutiondebate] Re: Re: Re: Steve notices
        > inconsistancy of list rules
        >
        >
        > I wonder if the moderators would consider this out of line or a
        > personal attack? I certainly do. Tim
        >
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: Dave Oldridge
        > To: creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 1:50 AM
        > Subject: Re: [creationevolutiondebate] Re: Re: Re: Steve notices
        > inconsistancy of list rules
        >
        >
        > <skip>
        >
        > Yes, but you don't understand Tim's trinity. It's Tim, the Holy
        > Interpretation, and the Bible. In that order.
        >
        > Dave Oldridge
        > ICQ 1800667
        >
        >
        > LOL! Most excellent, Dave!
        >
        > Again Tim identifies himself so closely with his ideas that he finds
        > it difficult to recognize an attack on his ideas as anything other
        > than an attack on himself. Leon

        I suppose you are now using this as an excuse to continue to avoid
        repentance. Typical of you God-haters, Tim.

        Dave Oldridge
        ICQ 1800667
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.