Re: Full disclosure (was Grand Canyon Tears America Apart )

From: John W Burgeson <jwburgeson@juno.com>
Date: Wed Jan 28 2004 - 12:05:42 EST

I had written: "On a wider scene, let the YEC scientific arguments be
heard (and properly
> refuted) wherever possible. Magazines, newspapers, etc. Whenever a
> scientific matter is discussed, the YEC argument against it needs to be
> stated, and refuted. Scientifically."

George: "This would be good if it could be done. I wonder how it could
be carried out
in practice. ... How would we get reporters &
their media to do this? "

I don't know. But notice I qualified my statement with the words
"wherever possible."
 
George: "OK, the govt can't officially say "The US govt believes that
diseases are caused
by bacteria & viruses & not by invisible demons" but the appropriate govt
agencies can
hold that view defacto & proceed on that basis - including the
enforcement of public
health measures. This seems a rather fine distinction - aort of like the
rule in the Middle Ages
that clergy couldn't carry swords in battle because they weren't to shed
blood, but that
they could use a mace because it didn't shed blood."

I don't see the analogy at all. Sorry.

We have probably beaten this one to death. I hope people read FRACTURE.
As well as Stephen Carter's book on somewhat the same subject.

Burgy

www.burgy.50megs.com/fracture.htm (Review of THE FRACTURE OF GOOD ORDER)

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
Received on Wed Jan 28 12:08:47 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jan 28 2004 - 12:08:48 EST