SETI and Intelligent Design Theory

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...

SNIP
* Dr. Rosevear is Director of the Creation Science Movement in England.

Which just about sums up how invalid any "science" he proclaims actually is.

I always wonder why creationsts don't take into account Polynesian,
Australian Aboriginal, ancient Egyptian, Phoeneician, Greek, Chinese, Maori,
Eskimo, Indian, Nativr American Indian, Norwegian, or other cultural
creation mythology.

The answer is simple when you ask them (and I do, it usually shuts them up
very quickly). The answer is always that they proceed from the inerrancy of
their own interpretation of the Bible.

Mad Scientist wrote in
t.cable.rogers.com:

The concept of abiogenesis is vital to the atheistic evolutionist.

Mischaracterization (or the fallacy of the broad brush). Not all
evolutionists are atheists.

Wally Anglesea wrote:

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
et.cable.rogers.com...



SNIP


* Dr. Rosevear is Director of the Creation Science Movement in England.

Which just about sums up how invalid any "science" he proclaims actually is.

I always wonder why creationsts don't take into account Polynesian,
Australian Aboriginal, ancient Egyptian, Phoeneician, Greek, Chinese, Maori,
Eskimo, Indian, Nativr American Indian, Norwegian, or other cultural
creation mythology.

The answer is simple when you ask them (and I do, it usually shuts them up
very quickly). The answer is always that they proceed from the inerrancy of
their own interpretation of the Bible.


That's a lie, and a clear cut case of generalization that you are no doubt by now known for in this newsgroup.

--
Usenet is filled with abusive and obsessive-compulsive-sociopathic personality disorder sufferers which makes it all the more easily ignored, dismissed and ridiculed.

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...


Wally Anglesea wrote:

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...


SNIP

* Dr. Rosevear is Director of the Creation Science Movement in England.

Which just about sums up how invalid any "science" he proclaims actually is.

I always wonder why creationsts don't take into account Polynesian,
Australian Aboriginal, ancient Egyptian, Phoeneician, Greek, Chinese, Maori,
Eskimo, Indian, Nativr American Indian, Norwegian, or other cultural
creation mythology.

The answer is simple when you ask them (and I do, it usually shuts them up
very quickly). The answer is always that they proceed from the inerrancy of
their own interpretation of the Bible.

That's a lie, and a clear cut case of generalization that you are no doubt
by now known for in this newsgroup.

Really? Show me a creation "scientist" who takes into account any of the
cultural myths I have listed, and looks for evidence to support them. Just
ONE.

"Paul Lawler" wrote in message
. 170.81...
Mad Scientist wrote in
t.cable.rogers.com:

The concept of abiogenesis is vital to the atheistic evolutionist.

Mischaracterization (or the fallacy of the broad brush). Not all
evolutionists are atheists.

DAMN! I missed that. And here's MS criticising me for a sweeping
generalisation.....