tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post3047549165514526..comments2024-03-27T14:50:47.345-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: Faith and Evolution at the Discovery InstituteLarry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-43594706530643688212009-06-15T00:03:09.477-04:002009-06-15T00:03:09.477-04:00You aren't a fly on the wall.
You are somethi...You aren't a fly on the wall.<br /><br />You are something I scrape off my shoe.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-49102131361298585772009-05-31T13:12:30.882-04:002009-05-31T13:12:30.882-04:00"Meyer is a 6000 year creotard"
I'm pretty sure t..."Meyer is a 6000 year creotard"<br /><br />I'm pretty sure this is incorrect. In the Kansas 2007 evolution hearings Meyer was asked how old he thought the earth was, and he said it was both his personal opinion and his professional opinion (as someone who has worked in geophysics) that it was 4.6 billion years old.<br />Also at the recent Texas hearings when he spoke he said he objected to having been called "a creationist" when he didn't think the earth was 6,000 years old. Although of course somebody can be a creationist and accept the ancient age of the earth (i.e. Hugh Ross, he would certainly be such a person).<br />So unless he has said otherwise elsewhere I'm pretty sure he doesn't believe in a young earth.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-73723308344370130352009-05-29T11:36:31.064-04:002009-05-29T11:36:31.064-04:00DiverCity asks,
I'm an amateur, Truti, but how ca...DiverCity asks,<br /><br /><I>I'm an amateur, Truti, but how can Behe accept common descent and also reject evolution? It would appear that he does, in fact, accept macroevolution as Larry says. What am I missing?</I><BR><BR>Behe thinks that God guides the formation of mutations, thus directing evolution. Either that, or God set everything up in the beginning so that it would play out just the way it has.<br /><br />Behe objects to the idea that humans are simply the result of random mutations and subsequent evolution.Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-44483714381873001212009-05-29T02:16:52.061-04:002009-05-29T02:16:52.061-04:00I'm an amateur, Truti, but how can Behe accept com...I'm an amateur, Truti, but how can Behe accept common descent and also reject evolution? It would appear that he does, in fact, accept macroevolution as Larry says. What am I missing?DiverCityhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07475857314061951650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-74022958524668183892009-05-28T21:21:20.432-04:002009-05-28T21:21:20.432-04:00It isn't possible to prove much - if at all - in s...It isn't possible to prove much - if at all - in science. The earth isn't 6,000 years old because nothing by way of evidence or experiment supports any such conclusion. In fact if even a small swathe of evidence were to be doctored to support such a conclusion the tools of science we use to make useful things would then create absolute junk.<br /><br />The dodgery institute's IDiots don't read each other it seems. Meyer is a 6000 year creotard, Behe is a yes common descent no evolution IDiot, while Luskin is ambiguous on everything. Wells of course is pathetically ignorant of anything.<br /><br />TrutiAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-82920278868385771962009-05-28T18:39:04.439-04:002009-05-28T18:39:04.439-04:00Wells' degree wouldn't be worthy of use as...Wells' degree wouldn't be worthy of use as toilet paper.. the man needs some serious work in critical thinking. <br /> Behe accepting the idea of macroevolution is a new one... although I'm not certain he'll call it that.<br /><br /> @ MartinC> if it were possible to prove the Earth were 6000 years old (which, it isn't, because we undertand radioactive decay and geologic processes a bit better than that), it would be a blow to geology and cosmology as well, along with basic physics (light speed anyone?) So no, the discrepancy would be key, if there were in fact a controversy about it... sorry, YEC is absolute bunk, and can be readily disproven by one of my students... OEC at least requires a little thought to trash.InfuriatedSciTeacherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14397655567633612539noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-13337162786895319902009-05-28T03:50:32.970-04:002009-05-28T03:50:32.970-04:00How about the idea that the earth is 6000 years ol...How about the idea that the earth is 6000 years old.<br />Or maybe 4.5 billion years old.<br />Apparently this discrepancy is unimportant (despite the fact that if the former was proven true the theory of evolution would be instantly falsified).<br />Teach the controversy!Sigmundhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00262375488263086844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-23500237770665412612009-05-28T00:17:06.594-04:002009-05-28T00:17:06.594-04:00Jonathan Wells will say anything. He just doesn't ...Jonathan Wells will say anything. He just doesn't give a hoot.386sxnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-38494583959179597662009-05-27T17:30:31.947-04:002009-05-27T17:30:31.947-04:00I'd love to be a fly on the wall.
I'd give that ...<I>I'd love to be a fly on the wall.</I> <br /><br />I'd give that a miss if I were you. If they read your blog they'll be swatting every fly in sight. You don't want to be a splat on the wall do you? <br /><br />But seriously, I'm as intrigued about just how Behe and Johnson get on as you are.Timothy V Reeveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03913020911593893925noreply@blogger.com