XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: alt.religion.christian   
   From: andrew.321.remov@usa.net   
      
   "Dawn Flood" wrote in message news:109hoef$350ek$3@dont-email.me...   
   > Andrew wrote:   
   >> "Dawn Flood" wrote:   
   >>> Andrew wrote:   
   >>>> "Kenito Benito" wrote:   
   >>>>> "Andrew" wrote:   
   >>>>>> "Kenito Benito" wrote:   
   >>>>>>> "Andrew" wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> "Dawn Flood:   
   >>>>>>>>> Andrew wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> "Dawn Flood" wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> PRIOR TO DARWIN, THE DOMINANT VIEW AMONG SCHOLARS WAS   
   >>>>>>>>>>> CREATIONISM!!!   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Get it now?! Yes, Darwin got some things wrong! Here's   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Darwin's BIG contribution:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> NATURALISM REPLACED SUPERNATURALISM AS THE EXPLANATION FOR LIFE!   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Do you need me to make things clearer for you??   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Dawn   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Thanks Dawn, but you see, Without a Creation there would be no   
   >>>>>>>>>> naturalism.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Unrefuted fact, again pointing to Creation.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Furthermore, conviction often came to him (Darwin) that he was   
   >>>>>>>>>> devoting his life to a phantasy. He said that often a "cold   
   >>>>>>>>>> shudder" would run trough his body testifying to that fact.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> "Often and often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have   
   >>>>>>>>>> asked myself whether I may not have devoted my life to a   
   >>>>>>>>>> phantasy." ~Darwin   
   >>>>>>>>> Andrew,   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Don't start! Okay??   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Why do folks like you get nervous like this? Because you   
   >>>>>>>> have been exposed to truth that exposes your position to be   
   >>>>>>>> indefensible. And that you stand on a platform that is false.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Dawn is a creationist? I'm surprised.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> No.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> But above you claim Dawn's position is indefensible.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Yes.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> As such, you are making the claim she is.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Her position is.   
   >>>>>> >>> P.S. If you want to explore Creationism (again!), then   
   >>>>>>>>> start another thread in a.a.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> It is _YOUR_ above that I am responding to!   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> I saw you were talking about naturalism and creationism.   
   >>>>>>>> I'm simply pointing out to you the simple fact that, with-   
   >>>>>>>> out a creation there could not possibly be any 'naturalism'.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Everything exists. How it got to this point is the question.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Where did it start? Do you ever connsider that?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> The "Big Bang" is where everything started.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> You apparently believe that. That the origin of all   
   >>>> things is explained by the fantasized explosion of   
   >>>> a primordial cosmic egg that came from nothing.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Although blatantly contrary to the laws of science,   
   >>>> nevertheless you believe~ by faith. Yet you still fail to understand   
   >>>> how foolish your position is.   
   >>>   
   >>> Andrew,   
   >>> We've posted about this so many times:   
   >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_model   
   >>>   
   >>> You can find these sorts of ideas in The Physical Review Letters; just   
   >>> Google it. Per the physicists, no Conservation Laws need be violated!!   
   >>   
   >> Hypothesized models may sound plausible,.but they exist only in the   
   >> realm of fantasy. Those who want the truth will not abandon the   
   >> established laws of science.   
   >   
   > You've never read these papers, Andrew, and you never will.  (I've read   
   > a couple of them.)  I've invited you to email the American Physical   
   > Society (the publishers of The Physical Review Letters) with your   
   > concerns, criticisms, etc., and you've never done that and you never will.   
      
   Although this is a discussion group, Dawn finds that she is unable.   
      
   Therefore she refers us to the high priests of her religion. But the   
   problem is, it is a false religion.   
      
   Although she cannot explain it, she is a *believer* by faith. And   
   says that if we have any questions to --> "go to them"; and don't   
   ask her, because it is ~ over her head!   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)