Title: Re: whats new continue
If my answer is unresponsive, does that mean only certain answers
are permitted like in the riddle you posed about the two Indian tribes?
Harry
RC Macaulay at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not so fast Harry,, when challenged by the intellectual Darwainians
Gosh !! Harry , Were I soliciting a simple answer to my
riddle regarding red feet vs green feet, I would have posed the question part as
..if you could determine if they were ( lying or telling the truth) to
..if they were green feet or red feet.
This group is swift,
Hi RC
Richard writes:
Mr big discounted as an unresponsive answer.
Wow, I couldn't have put that more succinctly myself.
So can we assume that you've given up on the creationist notion? (grin)
Mind you, I'm not asking if you accept Darwins theories. Just whether
you agree with your own
The answer I supplied challenges the question.
The question is leading to use a legal term.
An origin question presumes the subject in question
must have an origin.
Contemporary science and creationists tend to organise
themselves so as to provide answers to such inescapable
questions.
Creationism vs. Darwinism..
My simple mind looks at a 3 dollar wind up pocket watch
( Mickey Mouse type preferred) and a yardstick and ponders.
If I wind up the watch and as it runs I witness the
beginning of a measure of time.. or ..did time exist before I started the
watch?
Next. I have
Title: Re: Whats new continue
RC Macaulay at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Creationism vs. Darwinism..
My simple mind looks at a 3 dollar wind up pocket watch ( Mickey Mouse type preferred) and a yardstick and ponders.
If I wind up the watch and as it runs I witness the beginning of a measure
Not so fast Harry,, when challenged by the intellectual
Darwainians, their challenge in itself presupposes they can prove evolution.
Evidence of changes ,are of in itself, no
proof.
My question is simple explain the origin of time and
distance. Mr big discounted as an unresponsive
7 matches
Mail list logo
