re: inference

Glenn.Morton (XDEGRM@ORYX.COM)
Thu, 13 Nov 97 07:39:43 CDT

I want to add something to what I said earlier from home. The point I was
trying to make is not about an appearance of age argument, but that once one
says, like Bill did, that there is no experimental verification about the
past, one rules out all knowledge about the past.

if you don't like my elf theory then re-read my post and substitute,
Bacteria in place of elves
algae in place of elves

One can propose a theory that bacteria deposited the entire geologic
column and if you rule out experimental verification as being able
to help determine the truth, and if you further say that because there were
no observers, you can't say I am wrong, then any of the above theories
is a possibility. Elves only function as a place holder in my argument.
Could lichen have deposited the geologic column? Of course. because
under the rules above there is no way to rule it out via experiment,
and there were no observers to say that it didn't happen that way.
What? We don't see lichen depositing things today? The world has
changed. This is a fallen world. In olden times the lichen acted

We also don't see the Flood happening today either. But we DO see
slow processes depositing rocks today. And this is why the standard
geologic theory is better than the others.