From: duffy@aslss02.asl.dl.nec.com (Joseph Duffy)
Subject: Re: Logic and God (was: Young earth creationist logic NOT!)
Organization: NEC America, Inc. Irving, Texas
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 15:41:43 GMT

In article <Bu71tp.7AL@well.sf.ca.us> keithd@well.sf.ca.us (Keith Doyle) writes:
>
>
>duffy@aslss02.asl.dl.nec.com (Joseph Duffy) writes:
>>If you follow the original thread you'll understand that I don't
>>think either side has such direct evidence that they can produce.
>>Because of this I don't believe that either side can draw an
>>"inescapable conclusion".
>
>*sigh*, By the same logic, it is clear you are also unable to draw the
>conclusion that the Earth is orbiting throughout our solar system,
>approximately around the sun.  Do you realize just how much this makes
>you look like the uneducated savage who attributes all effects of nature to
>supernatural forces?  How much a mystery it must seem to you how humans are
>able to harness such supernatural forces that can illuminate your home at
>night.  Humans that are able to strike people dead at a distance with the
>use of a magic device, and make carriages go with the use of a magic fluid.
>Perhaps it is all the Devil's magic.
>
>I guess the experts are right, the educational system in this country
>is so bad, that we are about to slip back into Medieval times.  You
>know, before the age of enlightenment?  I guess the Gulf War is just
>the preliminary to the New Crusades.  Or Armageddon.
>
>Plain and simple, the evidence of evolution is so all-pervasive through
>geology, biology, zoology, and to some degree most of the other sciences
>that if it did not occur, God sure went one hell of a long way out of his
>way to make it all look just exactly as if it did.  Clearly, even the ICR
>must now realize this, as judging from the ICR Museum report, they have
>stepped back from the idea that there is "evidence of creation" to claiming
>that God in creating the world "fully operational" has created artificial
>evidences of age (trees with rings, Adam as an adult, etc.).  Which oh-by-
>the-way indicates he must have also created fossils of animals which were
>never alive, geologic strata which looked exactly like they were laid down
>not by a global flood but by multiple processes that are well known,
>gradual, and natural, with nuclear decay rates all artifically adjusted
>to give the illusion of great age, etc., phony ice layers, tree rings,
>all consistent with a billions of years old Earth, and inconsistent with
>a 10,000 or so year old Earth.
>
>Get real, pal.  Creationism is simply what Steve Allen would call, Dumbth.
>Insidious creeping fear and ignorance in the general population.
>
>Some of you may read this as hostility towards religion.  It is not.
>It is merely impatience with blind ignorance.  Unlike stupidity,
>ignorance is curable, so there's no excuse.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Keith
>

Yes it is curable, so let me start your treatments. The thread was refering
to the origin of life. The subject being discussed was abiogenesis/creation.
Whether or not either side of the issue could dogmatically state 
the why and how of the first ocurrence of life. It would be ignorance to 
compare studying the unobserved past (forensic science) to studying the 
observable events of the present. This is not necessarily what you have
done, it could be you were responding without reading the prior postings. 
Thats what Steve Allen would call... oh well, need I say it? 

Newsgroups: talk.origins