From: rokimoto557@gmail.com   
      
   On 2/26/2026 3:33 AM, Martin Harran wrote:   
   > On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 11:23:28 -0600, RonO    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 2/24/2026 9:41 AM, Martin Harran wrote:   
   >>> On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 09:22:19 -0600, RonO    
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 2/23/2026 2:52 PM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:   
   >>>>> On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 10:07:00 -0600   
   >>>>> RonO  wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On 2/23/2026 7:03 AM, Martin Harran wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> [about the RC church' postion on geocentrisism in mediavel times]   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Church was wrong or right; I don't care.   
   >>>>> It's not really about Origins is it? - and you both keep repeating   
   >>>>> yourselves. Let it go.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> This is the same type of Biblical denial that you repeatedly address   
   >>>> with the Biblical creationists that are left posting.  There really   
   >>>> isn't any difference.  Just think about it for a minute.  Harran doesn't   
   >>>> want the Bible to have been wrong about anything.  He wants to make   
   >>>> believe that it has always been faulty interpretation, but the   
   >>>> interpretations have always been faulty because the Bible is just wrong   
   >>>> about a lot of things.  MarkE is anti-evolution because he doesn't want   
   >>>> the Bible to be wrong about nature.  Stick still wants to believe some   
   >>>> of the young earth nonsense because he doesn't want the Bible to be   
   >>>> wrong about those things.  Sticks has enough on the ball to understand   
   >>>> that the earth and universe are a lot older than the Bible has been   
   >>>> interpreted it to be, but he still wants the Bible to not be wrong about   
   >>>> some of the young earth claims about the creation.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Harran still wants the Bible to be correct about the creation, so he has   
   >>>> to deny that it has always been shown to be wrong about what we could   
   >>>> figure out for ourselves.  None of them can accept that the human   
   >>>> authors of the Bible just did not fully understand what the creation   
   >>>> actually was, and just like all the Church fathers they wrote about what   
   >>>> they thought that they understood, but it was obviously wrong.  None of   
   >>>> them can deal with the fact that there isn't a single god-did-it   
   >>>> Biblical claim that has been verified by science or what passed as   
   >>>> science in the past.  They understand that there has been 100% failure   
   >>>> for their efforts because if they had any successes they would be   
   >>>> crowing about those instead of wallowing in denial like Harran and the   
   >>>> others.  The denial is all that they have left.   
   >>>   
   >>> Ron, disagree with me if you like but please stop TELLING LIES about   
   >>> me.   
   >>>   
   >> You are the one quote mining in order to remain in denial of reality.   
   >> You should just stop lying about the situation and deal with reality as   
   >> it exists, and not what you want to keep believing about it.   
   >   
   >   
   > Yet more lies as demonstrated by the fact that despite you constantly   
   > accuse me of quote mining, you have yet to produce a single example of   
   > me doing so.   
      
   Why lie?  Just explain what you did above.  It was obviously quote   
   mining.  You took a bit of the condemnation to claim something that was   
   not claimed in the document.  That is quote mining.   
      
   You have tried to make believe that what was in the first draft of the   
   document negated the reason why your source had been caught lying, when   
   it did no such thing.  The Pope condemned heliocentrism and agreed with   
   placing the heliocentric writings in the Index and banning them as   
   heretical material.  Your source was wrong about heliocentrism never   
   being condemned by except by the Inquisition.  They lied to maintain   
   your side of the issue.  Your side of the issue is the one that keeps   
   coming up short.   
      
   >   
   > I have persevered here because I have always had respect for your   
   > scientific expertise and I hated to see someone of your intelligence   
   > making such an idiot of themselves. I now have to accept, however,   
   > that the situation is irretrievable - your rationality is long gone   
   > out the window along with any sense of moral decency. I will now   
   > accept that and like just about everybody else here, simply ignore   
   > your hysterical ranting and raving.   
   >   
      
   You have been dishonest and you have needed to wallow in a denial that   
   just does not matter.  At this point in time science is only going to   
   determine how wrong the Bible is about the creation.  For those that   
   believe that nature is the creation, it has already been determined that   
   the creation that exists is not Biblical.  You acknowledge that some of   
   the early church fathers understood this to be true.  Their faith was   
   not based on what the Bible claimed about the creation.  For some stupid   
   reason you need to cling to the same denial that MarkE and Sticks have   
   to wallow in.  The denial will never change reality.  The Bible has been   
   "misinterpreted" about many things that we have been able to determine   
   for ourselves.  That is just a fact.  It can be "misinterpreted" because   
   it is just wrong about some things.  Just like the church fathers wrote   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)