Takes one to know one -- so I'm betting on the troll scenario :-)
Glenn Morton wrote:
>
> At 10:28 PM 2/14/02 +0000, Jim Eisele wrote:
> >Hide & seek comes to mind.
> >
> >In response to
> >
> ><< Please tell me where
> > science doesn't = Genesis One. >>
> >
> >Paul Seely writes
> >
> >It is not just Day 4 that does not fit. See
> >http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/Bible-Science/PSCF6-97Seely.html#The Bible
> >and
> >Science
> >
> >Paul, I have read that. And you make some good points (I especially like
> >the one about the fruit trees). And I guess that you just got yourself some
> >publicity. But please step up to the plate, and stop hiding behind a
> >previous paper. What's your biggest beef with the reconciliation between
> >Genesis One and Science? Bring it on. Let's get it out in the open where
> >everyone can look at it. If you dare. -Jim
>
> Jim, are you someone who decided to come here to tweak noses and see what
> kind of response you could get? Or are you a troll?
-- =================================== Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com> In any consistent theory, there must exist true but not provable statements. (Godel's Theorem)You can only find the truth with logic If you have already found the truth without it. (G.K. Chesterton) ===================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 15 2002 - 13:35:54 EST