celldog said:
And this: "There are none more ignorant and useless, than they that seek answers on their knees, with their eyes closed." Anon - Posted by Bill was a quote you chose to take personally.
How else do you take this? "Ignorant & Useless" because I won't close my eyes and wish away the possibility of a creator??? Go back a read any of my posts. Even if I thought your views were baseless fiction, with your hopeful monsters being found false or your trying to get the time to increase the probabilites of this order we have, I have never taken a persoanl shot at you.
I can only assume some insecurity.
The problem is that you don't provide any evidence of my "baseless views." You label finds as "hopeful monsters," not because of any substantial evidence against them (and I'm not talking about the two definite errors), but because it poses a problem for your dogma. Even in this post, you chose not to answer the plagarism of your posts.
celldog said:
Is the information true or false? You didn't respond to it. Instead you worry about where I got my information and accuse me of plagarism. What is your answer to the information?
And who says that the Biblical record doesn't agree with fossil record? That's certainly up for debate...even among Christians. Some believe in old earth. Some think it's young earth. All of this is based a literal 6 days or day ages (the "Day of the Lord"...etc.) could be a long period of time.
Either way, this takes nothing away from the main thrust of scripture which is God's plan for sinful mankind. His love for sinners like you and me. It's the typical diversion for those that don't want to believe. Sorta' like where did Cain get his wife. Even if the creation story is cloudy. The life of Christ is crystal clear.
You did plagarize. I wasn't
accusing you of anything, I was
telling you what you did. I don't want there to be any confusion on that account. As for the information by Dr. Gitt, who doesn't seem to have a degree in astronomy or cosmology, look
here. Now, if only you understood the science behind it instead of copy and paste from the website.
And you're one to talk about neglecting to answer responses. You ignore half of what people call you on.
And if scripture agrees with the fossil record, list the order of creation and then list the order of the fossil record. When you want the scientific answer go
here. In fact, read Genesis 2 and list the order of creation in
that chapter for some extra fun. They don't seem to agree. For those following along,
here is a Bible for you.
And now you're coming close to admitting that the Bible just might not be as right as you've been previously preaching. Personally, I don't care about God's plan for sinful mankind or salvation. I suspect we're lucky he didn't drown
us or kill
our firstborn for not agreeing with him. Sounds loving to me.

Quite frankly, I'd thank him to keep his psychotic mitts away from me.
One last thing, rest assured that there is nothing on AiG dealing with science that science doesn't have an answer for. Most of their arguments have been refuted years and years ago. I gave a link to TalkOrigin's list of creationist arguments. They have all the bases covered, with
real references to books and
real scientists who actually work in the field they are commenting on. Imagine that.