>From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On
>Behalf Of Dick Fischer
>Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 4:31 PM
>>Dick, As I documented, conifers are NOT among the first land life forms.
>The reason I chose "conifers" was to reference a plant type with which my
>readers (most of them not geologists) could identify. I hope
>pine and fir trees, suitable for Christmas decorations, "walked" out of the
>water unto land before anything swam in the ocean.
One can be accurate scientifically and still communicate by merely saying
'plants' instead of trying to say what kind of plant. Or you could have said
>Simply repeating the false claim, this time from your book, does nothing to
>make the claim true.
>Here is where you degenerate from a statement of geological fact into a
>personal attack. The word "false" could imply an intentional misleading.
Get serious Dick. False means false. It is simply false to say that fish
appear after plants. It is also false to say that conifers were among the
first plants to appear. As David noted, the upper devonian plants were not
conifers. All I am asking is for people who teach to get their facts
correct. We can all have different private interpretations, but we cannot
all have different private facts.
As to personal attack: When, last week, I suggested that Rimmer was a YEC, I
was speaking falsely. I had some evidence but Ted Davis corrected me. It was
not intentional. Even when I believed the YEC point of view, my false
beliefs were less intentional than a misunderstanding of Biblical
proportions! The problem I see in apologetics is that there is so many false
things bandied about by apologists one simply can't enumerate them.
However, false only becomes intentional when the person refuses to take
correction and change what they teach.
for lots of creation/evolution information
personal stories of struggle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 19 2002 - 01:00:37 EST