david ford wrote:
Bob Casanova wrote:
On 28 Nov 2005 11:24:41 -0800, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by "david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu>:
Ernest Major wrote:
In message <1132947753.864822.279710@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Dylan <desertmountainholy@yahoo.com> writes
"It can really blow your mind when you find out that intelligent
design is not the way our critics have said it is." --Attorney
Casey Luskin, founder, Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Club,
UC San Diego.
Read it (its short) and weep at:
I don't know - we have a DI functionary admitting that the Earth is
~4.54 billion years old. Pity it's only hearsay; otherwise we could use
it as a sig quote.
go away, young-earthism
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Pine.LNX.4.44L.01.0310190200530.8725-100000%40linux1.gl.umbc.edu
Is a collection of your posts supposed to demonstrate
something? If so, please spell it out.
No.
http://www.sdcitybeat.com/article.php?id=3784
Dylan, a pro-evolution creationist
Uncommon sense trumps common sense every time.
"a pro-evolution creationist"
Sure. I'm not one, but I can certainly come up with a
consistent set of beliefs for whoever wants them: "God
created the Big Bang and let everything following it proceed
by natural laws, including biological evolution.
Meaning of "biological evolution"?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-386md9F5lsv5cU1%40individual.net
Do you think there are "natural laws" that provide for the origination
of life from non-living matter?
If 'yes,' what are the names of those "natural laws"?
2001 Gerald Schroeder, 1999 Paul Davies, 1992 Hubert Yockey, & 1968
Michael Polanyi: [Davies]"life cannot be 'written into' the laws of
physics" presently known
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-33b2blF3tdum0U1%40individual.net
The Bible?
That's a collection of derived myths passed down by
preliterate tribesmen until someone finally wrote it down.
God had nothing whatsoever to do with the Bible. God left
the story in the structure of the universe where anyone who
can think can decipher it."
Do you think Einstein did "decipher it"?
Einstein: physics was designed
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-37f67dF59po8jU1%40individual.net
What Einstein means and what David means are two different things.
David believes in ID. He doesn't know what it is but
Meaning of "evolution"?
Biological evolution, one would suppose.
legerdemain in the use of the word 'evolution'
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132102419.915797.111840%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
Sorry, David, but your refusal to accept the evidence
doesn't constitute a refutation of the evidence.
yes DuFus^h^h^h^hDF, Your quibbles do not constitute even a comment
on the evidence. and is not acceptable evidence at that.
josephus
"your [df's] refusal to accept the evidence" of what?
.
