Messages Dated October 1998
81 - 100 of 5,037

Small evolutionary Lies!
Hi Alec, (Re: yours of 24-Sep-1998, "Small Lie, Big Truth?") [Laurie Appleton] [Karl Schneider] [HOLYSMOKE] At least I welcome your admission! I guess you mean small in the same sense as the rudder of a huge ocean liner eh? Ah yes, the small rudder on an ocean lines is NOT so small as to be non-existent after all is it? It means all the difference in whether the liner gets where it is going or becomes wrecked

Your Wild Speculations!
Hi Alec, (Re: yours of 24-Sep-1998, "Your Wild Speculations.") Then you display your confusion once again. Real science is a form of research that does NOT make any area of enquiry off-limits. It is only atheistic, materialistic, naturalistic "science" that tries to get away with defining some areas as "Off-limits". The "Golden Age of Modern Science" never needed to define the Supernatural as "off-limits". It is only since Darwin's time that the atheists have been playing

Rose Coloured.
Hi Alec, (Re: yours of 24-Sep-1998, "Rose Coloured.") [Laurie Appleton] [Dan Ceppa] [HOLYSMOKE] WRONG. He is in the evolutionary "make believe world" called "atheistic, matertialist, naturalism", where the facts are obscured by unscientific definitions about what are supposed to be OFF-LIMITS to the distorted sort of science that is "allowed" in that strange make-believe world! It is in the real world of true science as opposed to your make believe world of truncaded scientific delusions. Remember you

Facts Not Changed.
Hi Alec, (Re: yours of 25-Sep-1998, "Facts Not Changed!") [Laurie Appleton] [Kevin Mckenzie] [HOLYSMOKE] <+[Facts Not Changed!] [25 Sep 98 09:22][*][0]*> Billions of years do NOT prove or demonstrate evolution at all!. All they do is demonstrate that evolution is a typical fairy-story in the standard form of; "Long, long ago in a far far off time....." Yes that is true. I would, and have, but I found that you have a mind that is closed to

Another Fairy Story!@
Hi Alec, (Re: yours of 25-Sep-1998, "Another Fairy Story.") [Laurie Appleton] [Kevin Mckenzie] [HOLYSMOKE] Shouldn't you be getting back to the DEBATES echo where you can hide behind the fact that you have had me BANNED there! Your friend Sandra Peake might be missing you. Laurie

Don't Know How.
Now you are becoming even MORE confused than ever. Didn't you read what I said above about the case in question being one where it was PLIMER who was taken to court by Dr. Allen Roberts. and Plimer lost once again with damages of costs or whatever of $1.5 million. Laurie

Asian Ancestry.
"In the development of the 110 separate breeds shown here and recognised as breeds in modern dog shows the four ancestral sub-species have not remained entirely distinct. New strains have often been helped along by mongrelization, as indicated by the dotted lines." [in the chart shown] "The fact that dogs of the four different groups can still interbreed proves that they are really all one species but one of a diversity which shows how far selective cross-breeding

Birds and Dinosaurs.
There is no logic at all and does not need to be. It is simply a statement of the facts that have been consisistently observed by scientists like the famous Pierre Grasse, even if he is wrong about there ever being as much time as a BILLION years. There is no evidence that E. coli ever diverged one billion years ago from Salmonella or anything else. or that the opposite has ever happened. What Grasse is saying is that E.

Don't Know How!
Creation Science is NOT based on the Bible as such, but on the scientific evidence. That is why the word science is provided after the word Creation. Have you forgotten already that; scientists, until recently have been showing up at the debates ill-prepared for what awaits them. Thinking the creationists are uneducated, Bible-thumping clods, they are soon routed by a steady onslaught of direct attacks on a wide variety of scientific topics." (The Monkey Business, Niles Eldredge, 1982, p.

Evolution NOT Shown.
What is there to explain? A tautology is when you find things like "idiot" in a dictionary and it says see "moron" and when you look up "moron" it says see "idiot". The facts are that evolutionists themselves have admitted that their theory is tautologous as shown in the following from what evolutionist Normal Macbeth has written; <quote ON> 47 Natural Selection The large and easy aspect of evolution is that some species have multiplied while others have remained

Evolution NOT Shown (b)
Do you honestly mean to say that "descent with modification of all life from one common ancestor" has NOW been found to be totally wrong? If so, when was this dramatic about-face introduced by evolutionists and why? It is fairly safe to predict that something like another FIFTY years should "see you off" whether you "developed" physical fangs or not! What a cheery prospect eh? Dead, fangs or no fangs, for ever and ever! All your brilliant education lost for

From Monkeys (b)
Thank you. You therefore concede my point as well as admitting that right up to perhaps 1960 it had indeed been the standard evolutionary view point, of those of substance in the field. So we are making some progress and your previous 'outraged' outburst against me turned out to be nothing but an expression of your own limited knowledge of the subject. An apology would be the honourable course to take, to say nothing of

Don't Know How!
Why? Do you spend a lot of your time running around looking for stroke victims and being "sympathetic" over them? However, like yourself, I did assume that a stroke might have been what happened to him, but I have never been told more than what I stated. I am curious to know what has become of him since, too. For all I know it might have become terminal. I suspect that you might have a subject for your "sympathy"

Stability NOT Evolution.
Sounds like you have "been on a trip" and have received "new insights" eh? Any particular sort of mushrooms? Simple. In what year were your born? I know you sound like you might have been born only yesterday! Laurie

To All Readers.
Just for that you will be penalized by NOT getting your Velikovsky story this time. However, I don't want to be too HARD on you, so here is something else instead! "The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that "a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the material therein"." (Sir Fred Hoyle (English astronomer, Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge University), as quoted in "Hoyle on

From Monkeys!
Even Martin Goldberg had more sense than that, since he admitted that; My reply said; "Thank you. You therefore concede my point as well as admitting that right up to perhaps 1960 it had indeed been the standard evolutionary view point, of those of substance in the field." So your "OOC" statements are exposed as nothing more than mindless garbage and the ravings of an evolutionist who has long since been aware that it is not a valid scientific theory

Narrator or Transcriber.
Since I have *NOT* claimed that the Ark exists at all then your question is meaningless and absurd. What I have claimed is that an Ark, of the sizes given, could probably accommodate all the necessary animals and food. No one has been able to show otherwise. Instead they get all tangled up with questions of "banana slugs" and tapeworms etc. and only further demonstrate their own ignorance of such simple matters. Laurie

Not Science at All!
It comes from some evolutionary scientists themselves. For example, we read; in a paper co-authored by five eminent astronomers; "it is commonly supposed that the so-called primordial abundance of D, 3He, He, and 7Li provide strong evidence for big-bang cosmology. But a particular value for the baryon-to-photon ration needs to be assumed AD HOC to obtain the required abundances. A theory in which results are obtained only through AD HOC assumptions can hardly be considered

Re: Alien SpaceCraft's Are Re
Why, because you're otherwise totally incapable of moderating (censoring) this echo if people persist in not doing as you would want? You're a joke, David. Your whole forum of sleazebag ridicule is a joke. Kim Forwood Internet: FidoNet: Kim Forwood, 1:153/831

Re: Any evidence at all?
Oh, look everybody. Poor little Richard seems to have realized how much he is loathed for the way he shits all over anybody who he finds fault with. But, is it any wonder? Not just a notion, Richard. For most people, morality and ethics are an important part in getting along with one's fellow man. You don't seem to understand that at all though, do you? You seem to think that as long as somewhere along the line you keep