FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Forum index » diseases » hepatitis
Deal struck on US anti-terror law
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 2 [16 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page:  Previous  1, 2
Author Message
medicine forum beginner

Joined: 16 Dec 2005
Posts: 15

PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:54 am    Post subject: Re: Deal struck on US anti-terror law Reply with quote

"Kali" <kali@lart.com> wrote in message
In article <43efc191_1@x-privat.org>, posted 13 Feb 2006
00:15:29 +0100, Dr. Wee Hung Lo dr.whl@hocho.org says...

"Kali" <kali@lart.com> wrote in message
: In article <12Feb20065239@lart.com>, posted 12 Feb 2006 10:22:43
: GMT, Imperial_Leader Imperial_Leader@attilaKhan.com says...


: >Evolution is far from being empirocally proven, using the standards
: >of scientific proof applied to other scientific endeavors. The drum
: >has been beaten so long and so hard that it is the consensus amongst
: >academics that it has.

I beg to differ, Evolution has been Proven and DNS can tell us how old
Humans are.
The Problem is the Clovis First who ignore the facts in front of their

Man is much older than was thought and the evidence is all around.
Clovis says 13.5 thousand years Humans came here to the US but that doesn't
explain the Red Paint people who have been here more that 70 thousand years.

Also in TX a River Bed where Dino Prints go over Modern Human Prints.
Man over 65 Million years?
How about a man made object in a Rock formed in a Volcano 5000,000 years

These are some things they put in the back of Archeology Books in the
Apendix because they don't conform to science of the day.
Example: Dino's are warm Blooded that was ignored and Bones proving it were
hidden in the back rooms of Museums etc...

: Evolution (genetic mutation and adaptation) has been proven, and
: is not questioned by science. Theories about the origin of human
: life have developed out of this knowledge, and as theories, have
: not been "proven". I suppose one can believe in a creator who
: put life here, and that life evolved, but here you have religion
: (creator) and science (evolution). Apples and oranges.

I think both are right.

Man has Evolved but what makes Man so arrogant to think God is done cooking
him yet?
We have a long way to go before we are in God's Image.


You might want to check out this article

It throws a major kink into the theory of evolution.

Evolution is not a science,

Yes it is but ignoring the obvious is as bad as Evolutionists who ignore
facts until they come up and bite them.
Both are thick headed.


Evolution is a theory. A parsimonious, testable theory. I find
the evidence for it compelling. I find some of the evidence

As do I, but I know there is more to the story that would explain these


there may be scientists who study the theory
of and attempt to support evolution, but that is based on their beliefs
and desire to support them. The reason I say that is because when faced
with facts they either try to dismiss them out of hand, excuse them out
of the way, simply because it appears to, at first blush, prove them

I believe it has been well established that mankind and dinasours lived
and walked together at the same time in history, but that does not fit
their timeline so many attempt to dismiss it.

There is proof of that in TX where Dino Prints walk over Modern Foot Prints.


With the recently discovered and well preserved soft tissue mass of
extinct creatures it throws another kink into timelines that are
necessary to support the rather weak theory of evolution.

No, in fact it adds to our knowledge as DNA can tell us how many mutations
the animal went through that tells us it's age and what other creatures are
related to it.
By following the mothers through time in the DNA we can tell how old and
compare that to the Geological Record it was found in.


Theories about the origins of human beings is built on a body of
strong evidence for evolution, but not all those theories will
survive the rigors of scientific inquiry.




: Let's agree to disagree on this issue. You're adding politics to
: your argument. As a scientist I see it more fundamentally;
: religion != science, and doesn't belong in the science
: department of universities. It belongs in religious studies
: courses. No one is telling families in Kansas or Ohio that their
: children can't study and practice religion if they want to.

Religion tries to find what conforms to the Bible.
Scientests try to find the truth but sometimes they let it's own ego get in
the way of pure science and ignore the truth because it doesn't conform to
the Theroy of the day.


Then you would agree that any so-called science based on a belief
structure should be thrown out as well?

I don't understand what you are asking, here.

Yes and no.
If they can be objective then yes, if but then no.


In truth I find the arguments against religion being taught in schools
facetitious at best. It would be better it they just stated
religion=judeo-christian faiths since they support willingly and teach
Islam, witchcraft, Hindu, Buddhism, etc. have no problems teaching them
and also inject Yoga into various courses, like health or whatever.

I don't think many people would have a problem with religious
studies courses at any level, which would teach kids about
various religions. And there's no law against private religious
schools, if a family wants a child to be educated in the
tradition of one religion. The problem comes in when taxpayer-
funded government schools give preference to one religion over

I think Science and Religion can both be right if religion would be more
What's to say God's day and year are the same as our LOL!Confused)
Again, why I say God isn't done cooking Man yet!Confused)


I like the agreeable disagrement part, Wink, and while I would agree that
there are facets of evolution studies that can constitute true science
at the heart of the matter is just theory based on suppositions.

Gravity is "just a theory" too.

Not a Theroy, a fact that can be mesured and felt etc....
But there is a Theroy about Gravity but we will go into that another time.


We're better off agreeing to disagree, and enjoying what we have
in common, cuz I am an academic scientist left-of-middle
atheist... Smile I may be an arrogant elitist, too. *shrug*

"We found a great number of books...and since they contained
nothing but superstitions and falsehoods of the Devil we burned
them all." - Bishop Diego De Landa, who burned priceless books
of Mayan history and science

Hash: SHA1


Fight Spam Friendly Providers, use WWW.SPEWS.ORG

Version: PGP 8.1 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com
Comment: http://mysite.verizon.net/vzerry8x/

Back to top

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 2 [16 Posts] Goto page:  Previous  1, 2
View previous topic :: View next topic
The time now is Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:57 pm | All times are GMT
Forum index » diseases » hepatitis
Jump to:  

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
No new posts Warren Buffet's 37 billion and nothing for anti-aging res... Richard Lechter nutrition 7 Mon Jul 03, 2006 7:34 am
No new posts Warren Buffet's 37 billion and nothing for anti-aging res... adjuster@myway.com nutrition 2 Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:42 am
No new posts Warren Buffet's 37 billion and nothing for anti-aging res... adjuster@myway.com nutrition 0 Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:42 am
No new posts Insight into the anti-cancer effect of exercise Roman Bystrianyk cancer 1 Thu Jun 01, 2006 8:01 pm
No new posts NY POST/Reuters: Why Exercise is Anti-C Robert Cohen cancer 0 Thu Jun 01, 2006 11:45 am

Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites: email marketing campaigns , electronics forum, Science forum, Unix/Linux blog, Unix/Linux documentation, Unix/Linux forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0384s ][ Queries: 16 (0.0072s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]