 | | Re: In the interest of full disclosure...
|
|
(...) I've heard nothing about it in the Pittsburgh area, other than a poorly-written editorial in the Gazette. Be assured I will personally burn every textbook, funded by my tax money, that espouses creationism or intelligent design as viable (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: In the interest of full disclosure...
|
|
(...) The major scientific community? Are you basing this on Behe's statements or maybe the intro to the article? Most of the major scientific community that I know have dismissed Behe-- I know I have. He has flaws in many if his arguments. One of (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: In the interest of full disclosure...
|
|
(...) The article stated: "What distinguishes intelligent design from creationism is that it has won the backing of a minority of scientists" To my way of interpreting things "a minority of scientists" does not imply "the major scientific (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: In the interest of full disclosure...
|
|
(...) Hope away. Since you've demonstrated your inability to understand the processes of science and what science represents, your assessment of the alleged merits of Dr. Behe's theories is meaningless. (...) Yeah--just like begging the question of (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: In the interest of full disclosure...
|
|
(...) I can only hope that you take this as an indicator that the major scientific community does recognize the futility of macro-evolution explanation for how life cameinto existance and 'progressed'. The intelligence often pointed to is often (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | In the interest of full disclosure...
|
|
My views about creationism should at this point be fairly well established, but I came across this piece in the local paper today. (URL) Pittsburgh Post Gazette isn't exactly a rigorous scientific journal, so the inclusion of this article shouldn't (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 2002 Lord of the Rings Lego line?
|
|
(...) Yea, what a game... What I'd like to see is ICE re-release Riddle of the Ring. It was a nice game, and one of the few games I have ever seen which played well for 3 players (too many 3 player games consist of 2 of the players ganging up and (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 2002 Lord of the Rings Lego line?
|
|
(...) Fellowship of the Ring - Christmas 2001 The Two Towers - Christmas 2002 Return of the King - Christmas 2003 *sigh* Have to wait 3 years to see them all. ARGH! In any case, I'm sure we'll see plenty of merchandise, but LEGO sets would be darn (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 2002 Lord of the Rings Lego line?
|
|
(...) Err bad news.. from what I read quote The Lord of the Rings game will follow along the lines of the popular(sic) warhammer fantasy battle series unquote (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 2002 Lord of the Rings Lego line?
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) As long as it's not anything like "Fellowship of the Ring" by Iron Crown Enterprises. "So, the Fellowship player wins if he makes it to here by turn 11, but if he hasn't been to Rivendell by Turn 6 he has to make it over here to (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Support for a 'young' earth.
|
|
(...) That's an excellent point-by-point clearinghouse (with some cross-links to the talk.origins site I posted, as well). Thanks for posting it, Ross. (...) article is the singularly most unflattering "official" photograph ever taken of a person? (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 2002 Lord of the Rings Lego line?
|
|
(...) Well, there ought to be a lot of cool "wizardy" stuff...I expect potions, cauldrons, owls (hopefully they won't use the same bird piece they use for falcons and parrots), maybe a rat (is Scabbers in the first book?), castle walls, probably (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 2002 Lord of the Rings Lego line?
|
|
(...) I dont think lego are bothered with minifig size. look at the Star Wars anakin v's chewbacca, about 3 foot difference - both the same size minifig. The minifig has been around 20 odd years and hasnt changed. I do agree that the Harry Potter (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 2002 Lord of the Rings Lego line?
|
|
(...) Oh well I'd have to see what they came up with first... (...) The enviroment will shift to a magical castle enviroment once you read on... (...) That would indeed be a very cool product line, lots of possibilities. I have my doubts about the (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 2002 Lord of the Rings Lego line?
|
|
(...) I suspect that minifig proportions are actually correct for Hobbits and wrong for most others! Jennifer Clark (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 2002 Lord of the Rings Lego line?
|
|
Is it just me? I just cant seem to get excited over the imminent Harry Potter line. O.k I have only read 50 pages of the first book, but it all seemed to be based in a modern day town environment with characters who wouldn't translate well into (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Support for a 'young' earth.
|
|
(...) And here's a couple of late-breaking stories which seem to contradict the idea of a "young world": (URL) I havent investigated these at all... (24 years ago, 7-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Apples and oranges
|
|
(...) Of course the immediate question I raise about his research is what is the transmission spectra for carbon?... Still the article has a very good point. There are plenty of ways you can compare apples and organges on. (24 years ago, 7-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) Just a note: Trilobites as a group aren't gone after the Devonian. They take a major hit in the Devonian extinctions, but have a minor comeback, surviving until the Permian. However, that means it's a great example of evolution, extinction, (...) (24 years ago, 7-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
|
|
(...) What have I denied or claimed inapplicable? I've been presented only with some specialized snippets which I've ignored because they're based upon more foundational things which I'm asking for evidence about. Why is it (seemingly) such a (...) (24 years ago, 7-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
