[_ Old Earth _] See?

[reznwerks]

As I've said many times science will police their own when wrongdoing is found. The goal of science is to get to the truth and not as some have said walk in lock step with their colleagus. Below is the latest example of how the process works.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massac ... ated_data/

 

[Barbarian]

On the other hand, when an IDer like Jonathan Wells or creationist Jonathan Sarfati get caught in a dishonesty, they keep their positions and their fans still love them.

It's a cultural thing.

 

[PHIL121]

So are you two guys thesame person, or are you just 'tenured' together. 8-)

 

[MrVersatile48]

So are you two guys the same person, or are you just 'tenured' together. 8-)

"Where is the wise man?

""""""""""""the scholar?

"""""""""""""""" philospher?

Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?"

Come & discuss @ "The Art of Conversation" - 11/11 - (Armistice Day)

Helpful blog here:-

http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopi ... 057#218057

See http://www.philosophyinpubs.org.uk & click "schedule"

Or the "true identity" question - as in quote above - @ the following Friday Forum @ this EU Capital of Culture's respected Universities' highly honored Philosophy Outreach Program

CU in Berlin for next year's global conference maybe?

Must go!

Ian

 

[Barbarian]

If you think renzwerks and I are the same, you are the newbie of the week.

Go back and look at the posts.

 

[unred typo]

The Barbarian, cirrca 05 Jun 2003, is the evolutionary offshoot of a common ancestor of Reznwerks ( unearthed on 18 Dec 2003 ) who is the atheistic model, having shed his religious covering and developed the thicker skin and harder head. They are not the same species but share many rudimentary characteristics, giving that impression. While they are prime examples of the ToE, don‘t expect them to change in your lifetime. That takes millions of years. :wink:

 

[reznwerks]

thoughts

The Barbarian, cirrca 05 Jun 2003, is the evolutionary offshoot of a common ancestor of Reznwerks ( unearthed on 18 Dec 2003 ) who is the atheistic model, having shed his religious covering and developed the thicker skin and harder head. They are not the same species but share many rudimentary characteristics, giving that impression. While they are prime examples of the ToE, don‘t expect them to change in your lifetime. That takes millions of years. :wink:

You are still confusing your emotions with evidence. Beliefs don't trump facts and evidence.

 

[Imagican]

The Barbarian, cirrca 05 Jun 2003, is the evolutionary offshoot of a common ancestor of Reznwerks ( unearthed on 18 Dec 2003 ) who is the atheistic model, having shed his religious covering and developed the thicker skin and harder head. They are not the same species but share many rudimentary characteristics, giving that impression. While they are prime examples of the ToE, don‘t expect them to change in your lifetime. That takes millions of years. :wink:

Hey, that was pretty good.

 

[reznwerks]

moderator

The Barbarian, cirrca 05 Jun 2003, is the evolutionary offshoot of a common ancestor of Reznwerks ( unearthed on 18 Dec 2003 ) who is the atheistic model, having shed his religious covering and developed the thicker skin and harder head. They are not the same species but share many rudimentary characteristics, giving that impression. While they are prime examples of the ToE, don‘t expect them to change in your lifetime. That takes millions of years. :wink:

Is the moderator on break?

 

[Imagican]

Come on now, all in jest. You must admit that this was a 'pretty' accurate profile. And quite witty to boot.

 

[ArtGuy]

Re: moderator

The Barbarian, cirrca 05 Jun 2003, is the evolutionary offshoot of a common ancestor of Reznwerks ( unearthed on 18 Dec 2003 ) who is the atheistic model, having shed his religious covering and developed the thicker skin and harder head. They are not the same species but share many rudimentary characteristics, giving that impression. While they are prime examples of the ToE, don‘t expect them to change in your lifetime. That takes millions of years. :wink:

Is the moderator on break?

Lighten up, rez - that was hilarious, if a little pointed.

On topic, it's good to see this guy getting axed. I generally have high regards for the scientific community, and while I don't agree with evolution, I don't pretend that its supporters are in any way dishonest, or engaging in widespread conspiracy. That's the realm of the tinfoil brigade.

And don't get me started on ID. :x

 

[Oran_Taran]

lol, yeah that WAS pretty funny.

And don't get me started on ID.

Why not? I want to hear :D

 

[peace4all]

ive been warned for saying someone is liek rootbeer (thick headed if u didnt get it) so.. i mean.. cmon!

 

[ArtGuy]

lol, yeah that WAS pretty funny.

And don't get me started on ID.

Why not? I want to hear :D

It's not falsifiable, and thus doesn't qualify as science? I don't mind the idea of a religion or philsophy class teaching the ideas behind it, but it doesn't belong in the science room. All of the points it has that are actual science - the data points against evolution - should be taught as part of the regular evolution curriculum. But in spite of the fact that I agree with the central tenets of ID doesn't make the whole thing a valid scientific hypothesis, any more than the fact that I believe in the story of Adam and Eve means it should be taught in history class.

 

[Oran_Taran]

I don't mind the idea of a religion or philsophy class teaching the ideas behind it, but it doesn't belong in the science room.

Well, I don't mind the idea of a religion/philosophy class teaching ABOUT it, but I do mind them teaching IT.

All of the points it has that are actual science - the data points against evolution - should be taught as part of the regular evolution curriculum

ah, so none? lol... ok ok... enough off topic discussion :P

 

[ArtGuy]

ah, so none? lol... ok ok... enough off topic discussion :P

Don't make me hunt you down... ;)

 

[Oran_Taran]

you can try :-D