Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site qubix.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!cmcl2!seismo!hao!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!decwrl!sun!qubix!lab From: lab@qubix.UUCP Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: Re: Honesty Message-ID: <1157@qubix.UUCP> Date: Fri, 1-Jun-84 23:53:06 EDT Article-I.D.: qubix.1157 Posted: Fri Jun 1 23:53:06 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 5-Jun-84 19:41:25 EDT References: <2483@allegra.UUCP> Organization: Qubix Graphic Systems, Saratoga, CA Lines: 23 Alan Driscoll: > [quoting me] > > Again, we are NOT talking about the "christian version of creation." > > This is NOT a religious discussion, but whether a certain model > > SUPPORTED ONLY BY SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCES should be presented. > > Larry, if you're telling us that creationism is a scientific > theory, and nothing more, then I'm calling you a liar. I just > don't believe that you believe what you want us to believe. Pardon my mistake - I assumed Netters could read. SCIENTIFIC creationism *is* a SCIENTIFIC model. The favorite ploy of {press,courts,ACLU,etc.} is to deliberately confuse SCIENTIFIC creation with BIBLICAL creation. Whether the conclusion is the same is not material; *how* the conclusion is arrived at *is* material. (E.g., the book of Ubizmo says 2+2=4; should we then discard arithmetic from schools?) BTW, anyone telling me that evolutionism "is a scientific theory, and nothing more," is a liar. -- The Ice Floe of Larry Bickford {decvax,ihnp4,allegra,ucbvax}!{decwrl,sun}!qubix!lab decwrl!qubix!lab@Berkeley.ARPA