Re: Shapes of a Wedge

From: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Wed May 19 2004 - 17:12:13 EDT

 From: "Alexanian, Moorad" wrote

> Let us not confuse disciplines and their subject matters. The statement
concerning the”earth's sphericity and heliocentricity” are scientific
statements that can be readily verified by experimental science. However,
the question of evolution is the subject matter of a historical science. The
latter are based on experimental science plus a particular assumption
detailing the timeline of earth or the universe. There are many more people
that make our faith ridiculous specially those who practice the worst of
sin, pride.
>
 Moorad
This is plain wrong. You say "a historical science. The latter are based on
experimental science plus a particular assumption detailing the timeline of
earth or the universe." There is no assuming of the timeline of earth or
universe. This is the standard attempt to rubbish standard geological and
astronomical time by falsely alleging that vast ages are an "assumption".
They are a CONCLUSION not an ASSUMPTION, and in fact geologists in the 17th
and 18th centuries began with the ASSUMPTION of a young earth and had to
modify it upwards and slowly the timescale as we have it today developed.
Remember that there is not only the sin of pride but also of false
witness -9th commandment - i.e. not telling the truth.
I would suggest that before you say anything else like this you check out
exactly how "deep" time was worked out in the first place and the starting
assumptions.
Also note that your parody of historical science is shared by the pressure
group in Ohio, who has spoken a lot of false nonsense and caused havoc in
science teaching.

Michael

P.S. any comments Craig
Received on Wed May 19 17:17:59 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed May 19 2004 - 17:18:01 EDT