From: Walter Hicks (wallyshoes@mindspring.com)
Date: Sat Nov 30 2002 - 17:24:39 EST
RFaussette@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 11/30/02
> 4:54:31 PM Eastern Standard
> Time,
> wallyshoes@mindspring.com
> writes:
>
>
>
>> In my opinion, the
>> evolutionary THEORY, not
>> the "FACT", (excuse the
>> capitals) is
>> just a set of shifting
>> sand that is adamantly
>> supported by scientists
>> who refuse to
>> yield any ground at all in
>> their quest for absolute
>> scientific naturalism ---
>>
>> proven or not. Slapping
>> Band-Aids year after year
>> on Darwin's first
>> notions hardly
>> makes for an acceptable
>> theory by most scientific
>> standards in other fields.
>>
>> IMO
>>
>> Walt
>>
>>
>>
>
> what if you were able to
> find major aspects of
> evolutionary theory in
> genesis and so give the
> genesis "tales" scientific
> plausability, revealed
> science, if you will? If you
> were able to do that would
> would you accept evolution
> as fact?
> rich
I'm not certain if you are
mixing two different post.
anyhow, I believe in the
"facts" as they apply to
evolution. It is the THEORY --
should there really be one --
that I question.
Actually, I am impressed by
Genesis 1. Not sure what your
question means. Care to
elaborate?
Walt
-- ===================================Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
In any consistent theory, there must exist true but not provable statements. (Godel's Theorem)
You can only find the truth with logic If you have already found the truth without it. (G.K. Chesterton) ===================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 30 2002 - 17:39:09 EST