 | | Re: Credibility... (Was: Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!"))
|
|
(...) BS ECSE '85, Meng ECSE '89. Looks like we just missed... FUT: lugnet.people Frank (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.people)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not Both?
|
|
(...) Well, there you have it, straight from the great Lar's keyboard. And remember, Lar never makes misteaks... Frank (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I've said enough...
|
|
(...) It's often very helpful to watch a debate before joining in, just to get a feel for the dynamics of the group, if not just the subject matter. And sometimes it's amazing how much it changes when you actually are the one who's in the limelight. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 'Will ship to United States only - Oi!
|
|
(...) Ugh! Those forms!!! So many times (when I *was* selling internationally), I'd be asked to put "gift" and value of $20 on $60 order. I did it, but hated it, and generally felt pretty icky about doing it. I ditto the points Dan, Maggie and Mark (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.market.shipping)
|
| |
| | Re: 'Will ship to United States only - Oi!
|
|
Ronan & All, (...) Well, I am fed up with many things as well, it is understandable, but there are reasons for this. (...) This is on the borderline of good taste, and I think if you want people to consider shipping to other places than just the (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general, lugnet.market.theory, lugnet.market.shipping)
|
| |
| | Re: Credibility... (Was: Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!"))
|
|
(...) You went to RPI? When? -Erik ECSE '94 (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not Both?
|
|
(...) Something else I find interesting is that literal creationism also seems to be almost solely the preserve of inhabitants of the US, at least from where I'm standing. The only person I've ever come across in person in the UK who professed a (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not Both?
|
|
(...) (just picking a nit) I disagree... in my experience most christians only hold that God is fundamentally unexplainable. Creation and everything are currently unexplained, and may well be unexplainable, but that's not going to stop us from (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!")
|
|
(...) I have to admit, I find this a rather curious point. I know of no religion where there god must prove its/his/her self worthy of the worship of the individual. Further, I believe that if an entity, whatever it is, were able to create the whole (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not Both?
|
|
(...) Why? So you could avoid this point? "If you fault my system for not explaining the origin of the universe, why then, I fault yours for not explaining the origin of your god. No better no worse, explanation wise. A draw." I'd rather see you (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not Both?
|
|
(...) Thanks for summarizing, Dave!. I find Jon and Tim's references hard slogging for the most part, since they're obviously written for uncritical thinkers. They tend to be a tough read for anyone else. Of course, I personally have to disagree (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I've said enough...
|
|
(Note: I'm not debating in this post) (...) Well you're sort of right and sort of not. My problem with this particular debate is my lack of debate experience coupled with my lack of scientific training. To be truthful, however, I have studied the (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Hubris
|
|
(...) I'm extremely proud of my hubris. Dave! (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!")
|
|
(...) :-) I think we are - however, having read many ancient myths, I am ever cautious of hubris ;-) Jennifer Clark (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!")
|
|
(...) Ah, but it does. You're a Bricksmith, and Technic fans everywhere are saving their pennies and salivating in anticipation of the release of your first kit. And if *that* isn't an significant effect on the universe, maybe we're not in the same (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Credibility... (Was: Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!"))
|
|
(...) I guess I'm just stuck saying 'ick'... My instincts just tell me to measure courses by evaluated content, not time... But I spose if you wanted to measure it that way, I guess I can't say there isn't a logical reason behind it. Oh well... Oh, (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not Both?
|
|
(...) Clarification on Islam (and this is just my understanding, please correct me if any of the following is wrong): Islam acknowledges that the bible is a "good book" and does contain revelation from God (Allah), but holds that it is not the full (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Credibility... (Was: Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!"))
|
|
(...) Well, "credit hours" made a certain amount of sense at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute where I attended. A 3 credit hour class (which was an "average" class) had 3 hours of lecture per week (courses with labs didn't reflect the lab time in (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I've said enough...
|
|
(...) This is an important point, and worth elaborating. While anti-evolutionist are fond of saying that there hasn't been enough time for viable amino sequences to form, given the huge range of possible chemical combinations, they're overlooking (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why not Both?
|
|
(...) copyright, but I'll try to summarize as best possible. Statement: Christianity is unique Rebuttal: No quarrel yet. It is unique. But so is Buddhism. Uniqueness does not imply correctness. S: Its claim of necessity is grounded on strong (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
