From: Michael Roberts (michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk)
Date: Sat Nov 08 2003 - 17:40:21 EST
Q: How could the hundreds of types of dinosaurs-as well as all the other
animals-ever fit on the Ark?
A: There was plenty of room.
First of all, we need to understand that there weren't hundreds of types of
dinosaurs that needed to go on the Ark. It's true that when we research the
topic of dinosaurs, and list their names-like parasaurolophus,
pachycephalosaurus, struthiomymus, psittacosaurus, tyrannosaurus,
allosaurus, supersaurus and so on-we'll come up with over 600 names.
But as you research further, you'll find that different names are given to
skeletons that look very similar, but because they're found in different
countries, they get different names. Sometimes new names are given to just
bits of dinosaur bones, and these bones might belong to a dinosaur already
named!
Also, we need to understand that just as there's great variation in dogs,
all dogs belong to the ONE kind, so there was probably also great variation
in dinosaurs. It seems plausible to say that there may have been as few as
50 kinds of dinosaurs.
There's no problem believing in the Genesis account of the Flood.
**********************************
Now surely this IS serious nonsense and straight off the AIG newsletter.
What is the difference between that and the fixed earth site?
Surely the fixed earth site and geocentrics are only a little bit more
logically consistent than heliocentric YECs. Now even more logical than
fixed earthers are those who are true to the literal bible and accept from
Gen 1 , Exod 20 and Isaaih 40 that the earth is just what the Word says it
is -FLAT! Chug-chug!
Apparently there is a site on this on the DI megasite. Now just as IDers
want to sit on the fence over the age of the earth, this site argues that
the earth is a round disc but DI havent yet decided whether the disc of the
earth is flat, concave or convex, but they dont want to make an issue out it
as they want to keep a big tent - or firmament
Michael.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John W Burgeson" <jwburgeson@juno.com>
To: <tdavis@messiah.edu>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2003 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: YEC vs rational inquiry
> Ted said: "I apparently missed some references to the website,
> www.fixedearth.com. Like a couple of other geocentrism sites that have
> been around for several years, this is a serious site. More accurately,
> this is what I call "serious nonsense" when I describe it to my students.
> That is, they're dead serious about this nonsense."
>
> If a parody is really really well done, it becomes impossible to
> distinguish it from seriousness except by its thesis. I've been through
> the site a fair amount now. I am unconvinced you are correct. That is, I
> occupy my usual position of fence-straddling -- unconvinced either way.
> But I stll lean towards the parody explanation.
>
> AFAIK, the site and the "movement," (if any) seem to be relatively new.
> Which argues for it being a parody. OTOH, (as Tevke often said in
> "Fiddler," the geocentrist Gerald DeBow (sp?) has been able for years to
> hold on to his post at an otherwise respected university, Case.
> Presumably he does not stand alone; there must be others.
>
> OTOH, again, I respect Ted Davis when he asserts something as forcefully
> as the above.
>
> OTOH ... .
>
> Burgy (OTOH = On the other hand. AFAIK = as far as I know).
>
> www.burgy.50megs.com
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
> Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
> Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 08 2003 - 18:01:04 EST