I have a problem with that Sun and Moon being created on the fourthe day thing.
Whom would you rather trust for the age of the universe. Evidents extracted from rocks and stars "made by God" or the recopied text of shepards and dogmatic scholars a few hundred years ago.
What seems more miraculous, a universe over fourteen billion year old that will go on for billions more, or one that is a mere few thousand that is due to end before the next election cycle.
Howard Wu
Walter Branch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Walter Branch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Everyone,
Not sure what all the fuss is about with regard to the science/religion
thing. I just omitted the usual "vs." in that last sentence on purpose.
Too me, science is not a collection of "facts" because as some else pointed
out, "facts" can, and often do, change. Rather, science is a process, as in
the "scientific process" of experimentation and observation, etc. That all.
The process gets refined over time but it is nevertheless, a process.
It also seems to me that the two ways of thinking attempt to get at two
fundamentally different types of questions. Science attempts to answer
"how" questions, as in "How did we get here" whereas religion attempts to
answer "why" questions as in "Why are we here."
I really don't see the two fields as being contradictory, just
complementary.
As I said, I don't see what the big fuss is about.
-Walter
------------------------------------------
www.branchmeteorites.com
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger
