Re: What goes around comes around

janice matchett wrote:

> At 02:37 PM 10/8/2005, Pim van Meurs wrote:
>
>> Cornelius Hunter wrote:
>>
>>> Preston:
>>> These results are predicated on the assumption that evolution is
>>> true. Of course there is nothing wrong with this (Kuhn calls it
>>> "normal science"), but we need to be careful in using the results
>>> outside of normal science; that is, as evidence for evolution.
>>
>>
>> Seems that you are still struggling with this concept. Internal
>> consistency based on a well supported assumption is hjardly wrong.
>> What do you mean by "applying this outside of 'normal science'" and
>> see this as evidence for evolution.
>>
>> And you are still confused about your claim that there are
>> significant problems for common descent. Repeating your wishes does
>> not make them come true however.
>> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/ Of course ID still has no
>> scientifc explanations. ~ Cheers [Pim]
>
>
> ### Interesting what's being taught to young, impressionable minds
> under the guise of "science" (biology) in the classroom here.
> Intellectually honest people can readily see the direction into which
> the young people are being led - at tax-payer expense.
>
When you have something to contribute which has some foundation in
reality, please do so, until then, please don't embarass yourself with
this nonsense.
If you want to contribute to the discussion such as by showing the there
are 'significant problems' with common descent or perhaps if you really
want to surprise us with a scientific explanation relevant to ID, please
do so.

But I doubt it.

In Christ.
Received on Sun Oct 9 22:59:24 2005