Jonathan Clarke wrote:
> Hi Norm
>
> Woodward Norm Civ WRALC/TIEDM wrote:
>
> > SNIP
> > But then a much more horrific thought occurred to me...have our scientists
> > been so well indoctrinated that they are more willing to accept an old earth
> > concept, which can only substantiated through indirect measurement or, in
> > most cases, "authoritative literature" versus a round earth concept, which
> > can be substantiated through direct observation.
> > If the latter is the case, please take care in the use of the word "cult."
> > Norm Woodward
> > Warner Robins GA
>
> Several things here.
>
> Ignoring the use of the word "indoctrinated" with respect to the vast body of
> diverse evidence for an old earth, may I remind you that until the
> circumnavigation by Magellan's crew begun in 1521 there was no direct evidence
> that the earth was round. Until then it was all indirect and inferential.
> Nobody directly observed the earth as a sphere until the flight of Gemini 12
> (Aldrin and Lovell) in 1966.
>
> Atoms, magnetic fields, and X-rays cannot be sensed directly by human beings,
> and are known only through indirect evidence. Shall we denounce those who have
> been indoctrinated into belief in these entities?
& in fact even "direct observations" like those of the earth's shape are
interpretations of sense data that assume certain theories such as (approximately)
rectilinear propagation of light. There are no raw data entirely independent of
theory.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
"The Science-Theology Interface"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 12 2002 - 19:58:54 EST