Allen Roy wrote:
>>And isn't this "anti-technology movement" kin to the anti-science movement
>>championed by CRS, ICR, and the likes of Phil Johnson, et al.
>>You are very close to liable and slander. I recommend an apology.
I'll take that under advisement.
>>None of those groups are "anti-technology" nor "Anti-science."
You raise an interesting question. Is being pro-pseudo science a synonym for
being anti-science? I'll have to ask my astrologer about that.
>> They are most definitely "anti-evolutionism." Such a position is the
>>antithesis of "anti-science."
Evolution is a scientific theory of explanation. I don't subscribe to
every facet
of Darwin's theory. Frankly, I believe he got a couple of things wrong. But
taking an anti-evolution position just because you don't like it, is pure anti-
science. The core of Darwin's theory is that we are all connected to the
phyletic tree of life. Humans are part of the primate family because we share
common ancestors. That part is unassailable in my opinion. And you can bet
the director of the Human Genome Project, Francis Collins, believes that.
Up until 1986, the IC sent a team annually to Reston Bible Church in Virginia
for a three day seminar where they would lead groups through the Smithsonian
Institute and give them a young-earth perspective. They had done it for
eleven
years in a row before I started attending the church in 1986.
I also attended their seminar that year and took the Smithsonian tour - a
place
I had visited many times. The "geologist" in the group pointed out the
various
skeletons of elephants, mastodons, mammoths and other extinct species of
the same family, and explained that it wasn't necessary to load two of each of
them on Noah's ark. One prototype was sufficient to then radiate into all
of the
variations of animals.
"In just five thousand years all of these animals came from one prototype?" I
asked. He assured me that was what they believed. So I followed with,
"Would you call such a process "evolution"?
In essence their asinine explanation called for more evolution at a faster
rate
then even evolutionists allow! After the team, which included Larry Vardiman,
the head of the "physics department" at YEC U, left, I wrote a six page letter
to the pastor detailing their lies and deceptions. They never returned to
Reston
Bible Church.
>> Creationists will indeed welcome such news that supposed "junk gene"
>>actually have a purpose after all. This is what they have been saying
>>all along.
>>Looks like they have been more scientific that evolutionists.
Read it again:
``There is now clear evidence that (the junk genes) have been performing a
number of functions for tens or hundreds of thousands of years.''
Did he say that all the genes that have been called "junk genes" were
still performing functions today? See, Allen, you are a typical YEC. You
grasp at a single straw of evidence and twist it into whatever shape it needs
to be in to suit your purpose.
Dick Fischer - The Origins Solution - www.orisol.com
"The answer we should have known about 150 years ago."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 21 2001 - 13:47:37 EST