Originally posted by twhitehead That is because you have little or no scientific education. Otherwise you would also be objecting to large parts of astronomy, cosmology, biology, geology, and others because they all contradict some of your religious beliefs.
You know I have scientific education. Why do you say such a thing?
It is true that I did not get a BS degree; and my study to become an
Electrical Engineer did not require me to take biology, but I did take
Physics and Chemistry.
Originally posted by FabianFnas You have no problems with radio chronometrics anymore? You know, carbon 14, and other methods showing the timelines of verious phenomena on our earth? That shows the age of the crust of our planet to be billions of years old?
Good to know! Good for you!
I do not have education in Geology; but I have read there are some problems
with certain dating methods and assumptions that are made in the dating
process. So I do not accept the very old dates for that reason.
Originally posted by RJHinds I do not have education in Geology; but I have read there are some problems with certain dating methods and assumptions that are made in the dating process. So I do not accept the very old dates for that reason.
And I have read that an alien crashed in Area 51.
But I'm not enough of a crackpot to believe that without proper evidence.
[b] The only scientific theory I am objectiing to is the theory of evolution.
You lie - you also object to tectonic plate theory, and probably many more that we haven't encountered yet.
Many scientist believe it is just an hypothesis.
This, too, is a lie.
Only the evolutionists believe it to be a theory and s ...[text shortened]... et another lie.
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour, RJ.
Richard
Listen Richard, the main theory that causes all the trouble is the
theory of evolution. If it were not for the need to conform to that
theory there would not be forced errors in the newer theories.
Once the theory of evolution is totally rejected and thrown in the
garbage then the other theories will self-correct themselves in
time.
Originally posted by RJHinds My objection is that it is not what it claims to be. It is actually only
reproduction and adaptation resulting in small changes within a
certain type or kind of plant or animal. There is no evidence of any
major change that would come close to showing that there is a
common ancestor for all life forms on earth. It is a fraud that has
been exposed in ...[text shortened]... ith this theory to be taught because more
people may come to doubt the validity of this theory.
"Types" are an arbitrary construct. Have you ever heard of a thing called DNA? If you study it you will realize that "micro-evolution" logically implies "macro-evolution" over longer timescales, and an exclusion of "macro-evolution" logically implies no "micro-evolution". So everyone who believes in "micro-evolution" is actually a "Darwinist", as creationists might call them.
A nice analogy: http://www.christianforums.com/t7536666/
Originally posted by RJHinds But you are crackpot enough to believe in the foolish theory of evolution,
right?
P.S. Show me the evidence, show me the evidence, show me the
[b]EVIDENCE![/b]
Read that book i recommended to you, and this time get past the introduction. You cry where is the evidence and then refuse to read a book that contains the evidence?!
Originally posted by KazetNagorra "Types" are an arbitrary construct. Have you ever heard of a thing called DNA? If you study it you will realize that "micro-evolution" logically implies "macro-evolution" over longer timescales, and an exclusion of "macro-evolution" logically implies no "micro-evolution". So everyone who believes in "micro-evolution" is actually a "Darwinist", as creati ...[text shortened]... nists might call them.
A nice analogy: http://www.christianforums.com/t7536666/
Originally posted by Proper Knob Read that book i recommended to you, and this time get past the introduction. You cry where is the evidence and then refuse to read a book that contains the evidence?!
Reading books is no proof. I got books too. They say evolution is
hogwash.
Originally posted by RJHinds It is true that I did not get a BS degree; and my study to become an
Electrical Engineer did not require me to take biology, but I did take
Physics and Chemistry.
You're a electrical engineer without a B.S. ?
What schools offer a B.A. in engineering?
Removed
Joined
10 Dec '06
Moves
8528
26 Jan '12 20:38>
Originally posted by RJHinds Reading books is no proof. I got books too. They say evolution is
hogwash.
Would you please quit trying to save us and go about your business.
Originally posted by forkedknight You're a electrical engineer without a B.S. ?
What schools offer a B.A. in engineering?
I had to drop out of school years ago because I had financial difficulties.
I joined the US Army so that I might be able to use the G.I. Bill. However,
other things caused me to change my plans and I later retired from the
military after 20 years, a wife, and five children later. Never did become
and Electrical Engineer.