Did you read the site name?

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Jerry Milo Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Michael, your reverse list bears no resemblance in any way to the original 
> list.
Why? If one list can be a stretch from point A to point B, why can't
another list be stretched as well?

>
> And where/how did atheists get brought into this discussion?
Did you read the site url?

>
> The original list was created with the premise (with a little
> stretching) that if an invention was created BY USING THE PRINCIPALS
> of a science that you do not believe in, you should not benefit from
> or use that invention.
Except the premise is wrong. There is no problem believing in a
technology and its uses while disbelieving how ONE application of the
technology is used. A creationist can believe that the results from
Hubble are wrong or are based on a wrong data.

> A list of items create by a creationist inventor BASED ON THE SCIENCE
> of creationism, or new earth science, etc, would be a comparable list.
Except that many religious people, at the core of their religion, is a
belief that the universe was created by a creator. Maybe not in 6000
years (human years, that is) but there is a creator behind it all.

I'm only beating down on the list because I think the logic is faulty.
I expect better from an argument.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:341250
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to