Re: Hades - or Eden?
- From: Kendall K. Down <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 06:49:54 GMT
In message <871x0wnxxq.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Gareth McCaughan <Gareth.McCaughan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Assuming for the sake of argument that Harrison is right, that
> "New Scientist" has adequately reported his work, and that you
> have accurately reported what "New Scientist" says
Your favourite slur. As I have given the full reference, and as New
Scientist is freely available in newsagents and libraries up and down the
land, you can easily check.
, that would
> mean that a new scientific discovery has been made, which in no
> way conflicts with evolution.
Really? It just shows that the whole "hot planet gradually cools" thing is
wrong, that's all.
> So your argument (as usual) appears to be:
> - Scientists who believe in evolution have generally believed X.
> - Another scientist who believes in evolution has found evidence
> that not-X.
> - [Somehow this step always seems to be missing.]
Er - which step would that be?
> - Therefore evolution is wrong and the triumph of creationism
> is just around the corner.
Yep, the evidence is piling up. I realise that evidence is an uncomfortable
thing for evolutionists, who prefer to sit in ivory towers and present
theories as factcs, but one day it will have to be faced.
God bless,
Kendall K. Down
--
================ ARCHAEOLOGICAL DIGGINGS ===============
| Australia's premiere archaeological magazine |
| http://www.diggingsonline.com |
========================================================
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Hades - or Eden?
- From: Gareth McCaughan
- Re: Hades - or Eden?
- References:
- Hades - or Eden?
- From: Kendall K . Down
- Re: Hades - or Eden?
- From: Gareth McCaughan
- Hades - or Eden?
- Prev by Date: Re: Hades - or Eden?
- Next by Date: Re: Christmas
- Previous by thread: Re: Hades - or Eden?
- Next by thread: Re: Hades - or Eden?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|