GR>Absolutely. This is attack mode. Let me tell you a story. Back in 1978 I w
GR>complaining to my wife about several facts that the ICR crowd didn't explain
GR>and facts that they just flat got wrong (like the amount of juevenile water
GR>put into the atmosphere by volcanoes which H.Morris claims means that the
GR>seas can be no older tha 340 million years old).
GR>Anyway, my bride, looked me straight in the eyes and asked, "Can you do any
GR>better at explaining it?" Silence ensued. I couldn't do any better!
GR>Dumbstruck, I trotted back to my office, tail between my legs, to ponder how
GR>to explain the data of geology. Prior to my wife's gut punch, I had been
GR>content to do nothing but criticise (read tear down). From that moment, I
GR>decided that I would try to build a theory which would account for the data.
GR>It took me 15 years to come up with a view (the present one) which I believe
GR>actually works. ( 5 of those years I did no research having given up)
GR>My point is, that criticism without an alternative is nothing but stone
GR>throwing. It is saying "I don't like your view, but I can't think of anythin
GR>else."
GR>It is amazing how quiet it gets everytime I ask someone to actually explain
GR>the data of geology and biology within a biblical perspective. The silence
GR>even more deafening when the person has been a critic of what I am offering.
GR>Let me further say, that the questions I raised above are perfectly legitima
GR>questions for which someone can legitimately expect an answer. Is Neanderth
GR> preflood or post flood? Is he a descendant of Adam or something prior to
GR>Adam's creation? Why did he make flutes, build huts, build patios and walls
GR>If you believe that God really worked in space-time then you must attempt so
GR>answer to these very interesting questions. Someone who presumes to teach in
GR>the area of apologetics ought to have some idea of how to answer these thing
GR>If one doesn't, then what is he teaching?
GR>glenn
Please don't take the questioning as criticizing.
I am just surprised that you would limit the inquiry to those with a
competing model, as if they are the only one with credibility to ask
questions about your conclusions. It also gives the perception that when
really difficult answers are called for, one must take up the attack
rather then responding.
In our brief discussions, I have raised a number of observations that
have some merit, only at this point to be told..."Stop criticising, get
your own theory, and let's debate it instead of mine".
So be it, but I would think that you would like to see your model honed
to pefection.
Paul
to: IN:GRMorton@gnn.com
cc: IN:evolution@calvin.edu