 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Creation v Evolution
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: kendall Date: 02 Oct 00 - 08:14 AM You are right moonjen. However, this is also right..NO AMOUNT OF BELIEF CAN CREATE A FACT. By the way, Daewin never said "Survival of the fittest." He said "Natural selection." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: JulieF Date: 02 Oct 00 - 07:37 AM Sorry - I can't pass this one by without adding my minor contribution. I have no problem with people who believe in guided evolution, that 's their choice and I have many friends who are commited Christians but I can't cope with people who ignore vast tracks of knowledge in the name of creationisms. There is no place for creationism taught as science. I have read round the subject to some extent and a less scientific discipline is hard to find. There may be scope to mention that believers of certain religions have other views. Anything more detailed should be taught in religious education. I revel in the fact that we are not the centre of the Universe and there may be many many surprises out there ( but not here yet I think). I can marvel at nature without the need to see a creators hand ( but that's beside the point - we are talking what constitutes science here). I greatly agree with the statement that you should teach children to both think and respect other people's view. For example , my daughter is an atheist but she knows not to debate the point with her 95 year old Great Grandma. It was a difficult balance to get - as it is surprising how much religion is taught as fact in junior school. It was a proud moment when at the age of 5 ,she came home and announced that she thought that Adam and Eve were the first people to evolve. All the best Julie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Oct 00 - 05:08 AM My good pal Wilf, a lifelong socialist and atheist, insists that evolution cannot possibly be right. If it was, he figures, how come we still shit? ('scuse the language) Seeing as we have had thousands of years to adapt a better and cleaner way of getting rid of waste products why haven't we adapted to produce nice clean, shrink wrapped, waste products - especialy after we have just got out of the shower... Trust me to bring the conversation to a new level:-) What has the Forth bridge got to do with it BTW???? D the G |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Naemanson Date: 02 Oct 00 - 02:02 AM I think the problem is that creationism is so easy to believe in. If you want to understand evolution you have to work at it. In 1985 my parents were driving home to Maine through Georgia and stopped in to visit us. They recounted a conversation they overheard in a local diner. Apparenly the people involved had just come from church and were discussing what they knew of evolution. As they seemed to understand it there was a monkey that one day turned into a human. Until people are better educated this kind of misunderstanding will continue. And the education will not take hold in people who don't want to hear it. So this debate will continue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: katlaughing Date: 02 Oct 00 - 01:27 AM Guest, Lyle, thanks for your *on-the-spot* reporting from Kansas. It was very interesting. Your advice re' "stealth" candidates for school boards and the like is of note. That is something that has been going on for about twenty years. We have a school board member here who has been tracking such activity, across the nation, for at least that long and has been a guest speaker on the subject. Sad to say she is not running for re-election this time. She is tired of fighting them. Unfortunately, here at least, a lot of people agree with the Creationism teachings and want board members who agree, or, they are voting uninformed. We already have at least two members of that type and a new election coming up with at least one more identified as such. It is worse, as those who predominate have demanded and gotten an exclusive school, financed by the district and state, which allows them to teach in a very strict, old-fashioned way, along with stressing creationism. The way that they are funded, by the board, is out of all proportion to any other student body. kat
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: CarolC Date: 02 Oct 00 - 01:22 AM I like swamps. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Amos Date: 01 Oct 00 - 11:55 PM The thing about this stupid argumnet that always ends up making absolutely no sense to me is this. Given that there are more than 2 billion creative individuals on this planet, in various states of disrepair, just counting the ones who are operating meat bodies, why in hell would anyone assume that creation as a component of reality or the driving force behind the existence of All-that-is or any part thereof should be attribtuable to just one pointof view or one spiritual entitiy?
You have to take due care not to get tangled up in the identification between "Creationism" as a fundamentalist Bible-based doctrine and any other model which includes creative powers of any sort into the ontology of things. One of them seems to map a lot closer to observed data than the other. 'Course that's just common sense, which never did stand up real well to revealed Truth. Sigh.... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Troll Date: 01 Oct 00 - 11:42 PM Maybe God's pissed at you.***BG*** troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Gary T Date: 01 Oct 00 - 11:38 PM Well, John, I would say "You're just lucky, I guess." (Didn't say it was good luck--VBG.) I too love Hearts. Haven't had a chance to play it with humans for a while (my wife doesn't care for it), but I play it, so to speak, on the computer. Dang programs don't seem to have a learning curve--can't worry them or mislead them very well. Now you all have me itching to get a local game going. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: bbelle Date: 01 Oct 00 - 11:16 PM You should ask? Because you are a dumbshit! *BG*
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: John Hardly Date: 01 Oct 00 - 11:13 PM Why am I always dealt the loner queen on the hold hand?!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: GUEST,Lyle Date: 01 Oct 00 - 11:01 PM Well, I shouldn't get into this because I could write volumes which I imagine nobody would read, but as a member of the science community in Kansas, I need to respond at least a bit. First of all, the title of this thread is wrong if you are referring to what happened in Kansas. NEVER confuse CREATION with CREATIONISM!!!!!!!!! Every major religion that I know of, and a lot of religious bodies that I know little of, have their own idea, belief, dogma, call it what you will, about the creation story and noone in any public school has ever questioned those. Creationism, on the other hand, is a very narrow and specific belief system that was brought to the forefront in this country in the late '60's and early 70's, mainly by Henry and Gish (they being the leaders). Their believes are too long to go into here, but some of them are that the world and everything in it was created at the same time about 6000 to 10,000 years ago. Obviously, that does away with geology, physics, chemistry, and biology as it is practiced today. Evolution is being singled out by the creationists as the "bad guys" because of the emotion it generates, and the purpose of the creationists is to have one and only one creation story, and that one should, they say, be taught in public schools. In Kansas, a group of science persons wrote State Standards for science. IMHO, they were excellent. Then some of the fundamentalist creationists got elected to the State Board of Education. They rewrote what the science people had written about evolution by taking it completely out of the standards. It was later shown that the board member who rewrote what had been written by science people was written by: Ta Dum - a Creationist. Also - never forget that all fundamentalists are not creationists. We recently had a primary election for school Board officials in the state, and all but one of the anti-evolutionists lost. Several of the candidates (from both parties) have assured us that the original standards will be back in place in January. Two lessons to be learned here: 1- There is a difference between creation and creationists and 2 - Be careful of very biased strong willed people who are single issue. Their most recent MO seems to be to get on local boards disguised as something else until they are elected. Lyle |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Metchosin Date: 01 Oct 00 - 10:06 PM OK! Dumshits unite! Whose got the two of Clubs? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: bbelle Date: 01 Oct 00 - 09:59 PM John, join in, the Hearts game is going strong. BTW ... you are in good company ... "Dumbshits R Us." moonjen |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Metchosin Date: 01 Oct 00 - 09:57 PM Wow! Hearts used to be my strong suit. Did you also know it as Dirty Aggie or Bu**er Your Buddy?...Moonjen, John, looks like we have enough players to start a game. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: John Hardly Date: 01 Oct 00 - 09:50 PM I'm such a dumbshit. Is there an acronym for that? It's "peace not piece".--------John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Little Neophyte Date: 01 Oct 00 - 09:29 PM Did you ever see the movie Contact? I think that movie gave me the clearest answer to the questions surrounding Creation vs Evolution. Little Neo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: bbelle Date: 01 Oct 00 - 09:16 PM kendall ... you wrote "I dont know how anyone can deny the existence of evolution." The "how" is because they believe differently than you. Very simple. It's called "freedom of thought." We still have that, don't we? moonjen |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Ely Date: 01 Oct 00 - 08:45 PM JH, I'm sure some of them saw it. But some of them didn't, either (probably because none of them had ever stopped railing against it long enough to find out that "Darwinism" means something besides "your grandfather was a monkey"). [in general, not to John Hardly specifically] So, is it NOT persecution for people of faith to tell other people that their theology/lack thereof is wrong? One could argue that that's what happens when they only teach Christian creationism, or evolution "with the help of God". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: John Hardly Date: 01 Oct 00 - 08:22 PM Spaw'n'Moonjen, I AM A CRAZED HEARTS ADDICT! Deal me in. Do you play Jack of Diamonds or no? John Millring Hardly |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: kendall Date: 01 Oct 00 - 08:10 PM I dont know how anyone can deny the existence of evolution. You can see it with your own eyes! How do you think ,say, the aids virus has managed to survive? because it EVOLVES and stays ahead of our science. But, as Bill said, maybe it in itself is Gods plan? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: John Hardly Date: 01 Oct 00 - 08:05 PM Fionn, If you read right then I wrote wrong. What I tried to say is that (though there is no need to deny the teaching of evolution) it is persecution (though that may be an inaccurate word to use) to tell people of faith that they are wrong--granted a pluralistic society. I also added the fact that we are talking about state schools funded by both the religious and the non. Right now it seems to be a good compromise to allow for both--teach evolution but allow that a god might have had a hand in it. The place where this becomes more explosive is contained in Gary T's statement that "theology is not an objective matter". Actually, any theology believed is, to that person, and objective matter. That's what belief in a religion is after all. It doesn't imply how dogmatic one might hold those beliefs--I, for one, believe what I believe and of course I think that I'm right to a certain extent (or I wouldn't BELIEVE in the first place). Gary would have been more accurate had he said "theology is not an emperical matter". We tend to be able to live in a pluralist society as long as those theologies held objective do not interfere with the rights of others to believe as they objectively believe. So far, our society has had room for, and respect for many diverse beliefs. The irony to me is that Christianity, as I understand it, is a matter of volitional belief--thereby theoretically posing no threat. In a pluralist society Christians should be able to participate in our democracy on an equal footing with other citizens. If, informed by one's religion, one believes something to be good for a society he should vote for it and if he thinks it is harmful to society he should vote against it. The reason the boom is soon to be lowered on what you have been referring to as Fundamentalist Christians is that, counter to their own theology they seem to think that they can change the souls of man by changing his behavior--diametrically opposed to true Christian theology IMO. Society won't have it and will strike back. Incidentally, rather than "religion invented to give man piece of mind", I might say "Man lacks piece of mind because he eschews his natural state of faith" Respectfully, John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Bill D Date: 01 Oct 00 - 08:00 PM It simply makes no difference...one person can believe in evolution 'without' religion, and another can believe that evolution is just the way God planned and designed it all to work. And, of course, one *can* postulate clever aliens who manipulated the gene pool....and dozens of variations on any of these themes!. The important thing is that all these approaches involve not only different ways of viewing, but different concepts of logic and proof....as well as different premises and first principles! So, as Praise says, it takes some careful talking to even decide how to do the discussion...
Fortunately, in most of the countries we Mudcatters live in, there is reasonable 'freedom of religion'.......but freedom OF religion requires freedom FROM religion for those who desire it in order to make sense.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Mbo Date: 01 Oct 00 - 07:56 PM Well Fionn, you could look at it like this too. You're not really singing, and what you "sing" does not come from your heart. A heart is a muscular organ that has no ability whatsoever to produce emotion. Your brain is an organ of which tiny neurons are firing rapidly and constantly, having more "feeling" when a song is memorized means nothing more except that neurons are firing differently. "Love" is just a mixture of chemicals and nerves. "Singing" is just a column of air vibration the cartilage in your vocal cords. Come to think of it, "music" is just a bunch of sonic vibrations. All depends on how you look at it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: flattop Date: 01 Oct 00 - 07:45 PM Praise is not just below her usual form. She left the building. Ya got a wee break, Fionn, because Praise signed off after she posted. I believe that you are a journalist. You probably know that news is generally exceptions, not the norm. I stick with my original statement that most religious people that I see are doing good these days, not evil. A few exceptions make the news. If you have to go back through history to find examples, perhaps Christianity can't be all bad. Going back through history you might even uncover an evil scientist or two or an educated and unscrupulous journalist. Who knows? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: bbelle Date: 01 Oct 00 - 07:44 PM Ah, c'mon 'spaw ... Quayle wasn't Indiana's fault ... they'll be livin' that one down 'til the end of creation. Hearts it is ... moonjen |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: catspaw49 Date: 01 Oct 00 - 07:38 PM BTW Mac......Indiana-Dan Quayle. Nuff said. (apologies to DaveO, Dulci46, Homeless, and any other Hoosiers) Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: catspaw49 Date: 01 Oct 00 - 07:32 PM I prefer Hearts....good strategy game with a beutiful combination of skill and chance blended together. AND Mooh..........Not to worry about the Leafs. Count up how many times they play the new team down here in Columbus, the Blue Jackets, and figure all of those to be wins. See, your season's looking better already isn't it? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Oct 00 - 07:32 PM What's with this idea that there has to be some kind of conflict between evolution and creation? If creation means anything, it's about what keeps the whole show on the road here and now, not about something that happened or didn't happen once upon a time.
Incidentally, why pick on Kansas? Back in 1897 the General Assembly of Indiana pased a law ruling that the value of Pi was four |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: bbelle Date: 01 Oct 00 - 07:09 PM Anyone need a fourth for Bridge? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Peter K (Fionn) Date: 01 Oct 00 - 07:01 PM Thanks to Gary T for additional info - that's the story I heard, rather than the more local stuff Paddymac mentioned. But Prometheus, thosp? Wasn't he the ultimate flamer - the guy who played with fire? Much to my relief, the evolutionists seem to be winning in this thread, if only because Praise is below her usual form *BG* What truly amazes me from the posts here is the discovery that there are people in the educated world who deny evolutionary science. I really had no idea. If I read right, John Hardly, you are saying that to teach evolutionary science is to persecute religion. Again I'm amazed. It doesn't leave much room for the "bit of both" theory! I suspect flattop knows full well that you don't have to go to Sheffield to find the vile downside of religion. Just look at history (before it is banned for being counter-creation!). But a good point from Rich - looks like religion was invented for our peace of mind. Here's a thought for creationists, if any can be bothered. Scientific opinion is reaching broad agreement that conditions for life as we know it (but not necessarily life itself) are replicated a millionfold across the universe. And there is a statistical probability of life itself existing, or having existed, on 5-15,000 planets in our own galaxy alone. Presumably there is no theological argument why this need not be so? And there are of course millions of galaxies. Now: one god (albeit three-in-one) for the whole lot? Or one per planet? One per galaxy? If it is one for the lot, is it plausible, or merely risible, that a god with so much scope to keep boredom at bay could be bothered to play a small-minded game with Planet Earth, in which extra points are awarded according to how much we flatter and worship him; and godly intervention may be sought in illnesses, exam results and even ballgames, according to numbers of candles lit, prayers offered etc? Maybe God needs to get a life, or to join the Mudcat? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Naemanson Date: 01 Oct 00 - 06:22 PM I am glad to see the general run of this thread has not developed into a bash the (choose your favorite religion, religious person or skeptic). You all deserve congratulations for that. I am one of those who cannot accept creationism. I would rather like the picture of humanity hauling itself up by the bootstraps from the soup of the primordial biologic ooze. It makes more sense to me than being the science project of anyone, either space aliens or supernatural being. Having said that I would like to point out there are many real scientists (as opposed to creation scientists) who have no trouble fitting their faith into their lives as they work on the science of evolution. This is as it should be because we are after all talking apples and oranges. If the creationists hadn't insisted on taking their religion into the schools we wouldn't be having this debate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Jeri Date: 01 Oct 00 - 06:15 PM OK...here goes. The biggest problem occurs when schools don't teach kids TO think, not WHAT TO think - how to ask questions, get different opinions, research, use evidence. Truth is more than what someone tells them. Many religious leaders have answers for everything. People expect that - there will never be an unanswered question, and whether it's right or wrong is impossible to determine if the answer is based solely on belief. They rely on people's distaste for uncertainty. Creationists argue that science is just another belief system, and there are some that believe all the fossils ever found are hoaxes. It's a bit like sitcking one's fingers in one's ears when one doesn't want to hear something. What's frightening about parents not wanting their kids to learn evolution is that what they're really doing is preventing the kids from hearing views different from theirs. If the kid doesn't hear different explanations, they don't have to ever decide whom to believe. That amounts to mind control.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Ebbie Date: 01 Oct 00 - 05:44 PM A slight segue here: One of the weird complications in religion discussions is that we frequently tend to say Christian when we mean godly or whatever. I'm sure we have all known people whom we would term godly, when we know nothing at all of their beliefs as far as Jesus, the Christ, is concerned. I am in awe of godliness- in the sense of love, wholeness, openness, clarity, wide-views, acceptance, (put in your own awes here)wherever I find it but I really am not speaking of Jesus when I say that. I suspect I'm not alone in this. And surely Jews and Moslems don't say that. So why do we? One thing that occurs to me is that in my experience, fundamentalists, per se, tend to view the ecumenical movement as one of the greatest threats to christianity (that word again!)And I suppose the pope may feel the same way about the pick and choose approach that many modern Catholics use these days. Back to the sujbect: I agree with those who suspect the truth is a combination of both creation and evolution and I don't perceive a conflict between them. On the one hand, it doesn't seem that in nature, things get better by themselves- a scrap of a thing left in the rain tends to rust or rot, not metamorphose into a car or a racehorse- but on the other hand, physical laws clearly govern life- and that information is repeatable. On the third hand, (Don't you think human beings should have three hands? Two to hold something and the third to do the work?) it seems to me to take a greater leap of faith to believe that life itself just happened from materials already there (Question: Where did those materials come from? Answer: They were always there. Seems like that's a statement that could come from the creationist side.)than it is to believe in the hand of a Creator that set everything else in motion. (Maybe we are somebody's ant farm? One goldfish to another: Of course, there is a god. Who do you suppose changes our water?) Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: John Hardly Date: 01 Oct 00 - 05:30 PM Ely, It's likely that your ag friends have noted that in an empirical way, selective breeding casts more doubt than confirmation on evolution (as currently taught). John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Troll Date: 01 Oct 00 - 05:18 PM Since there is very little I can do about it (the truth or falsity of either theory) I don't worry about it. The METS! Get real. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Ely Date: 01 Oct 00 - 05:11 PM What has always amazed me is that some of the people I knew who were most opposed to evolution were ag types. What did they think selective breeding was? If it wasn't for [human-directed] "evolution", we wouldn't have any of our familiar food crops or livestock. Oh, well. I guess a lot of it depends on your background and what you already know. I don't know it all about evolutionary theory, of course (nobody does), but there is a lot of stuff that I don't understand about religion, either. Where did God come from? It makes no more sense to me that He was just "there" than it does to my fundamentalist acquaintances that life "just happened". Maybe I just don't know enough about Christianity. I wonder, do these parents object to their children learning about Classical myths, too? What about the days of the week (the names of which are all pagan)? Christmas trees? Easter eggs? What about all the holidays that Christians borrowed from earlier religions? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Jon Freeman Date: 01 Oct 00 - 04:50 PM I've read nothing... I am just try to wrestle with my own Christian beliefs and my limited sciecntific knowledge (which is more based on things that I know we can do now) and fail to make the 1+1=2 and try to work out alternatives. Is it possible that a) There is a super power and b) that there are other invisible creatures and c) that some of what we (in my Bible) call angels were in fact aliens? It is the only way that I can make sense of it all. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Metchosin Date: 01 Oct 00 - 04:32 PM Years ago in Junior High, a friend asked me how I knew we weren't just someone' or something's science project for which they got a "D"? I spent a number of years staring down a microscope at lifeforms that had no ability to perceive they were being observed and smiling when I remembered his question. Took me a moment Spaw, but I couldn't figure out why you seemed to be soliciting a comment from me. Duh! Combination of egocentricity and the fact that baseball isn't my strong suit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: DougR Date: 01 Oct 00 - 03:58 PM How old ARE you, Kendall? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: John Hardly Date: 01 Oct 00 - 03:57 PM Great humor guys, and I suppose I ought to just drop it as you wish. Gary T, if you're interested in my replying, PM me, otherwise I'll gladly submit to your having the last word. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: rube1 Date: 01 Oct 00 - 03:53 PM Jon, you must have been reading Zecheria Sitchin's book or books lately. In them, the great unanswered questions of history and time point back to his translations of Sumerian cuneiform tablets. These books, written by the world's foremost authority on cuneiform translations, offers an explanation of ancient creation myths that is rooted in science and scholarship, not conjecture. I've looked for informed criticism of his works and have found a conspicuous absence of scholarly debate. Where are the other great minds willing to take him on? Between creationism and evolution lies the source of ancient knowledge-Sumer. THE TWELFTH PLANET is the first book of the series THE EARTH CHRONICLES. Questioning minds will find them endlessly fascinating. Biblical scholars will find interpretations deepened. Evolutionists and scientists will find many of the ancient historical links that for centuries have been missing. Back to the original question, creationism vs evolution: neither explanation, by itself, is fully satisfying. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Mooh Date: 01 Oct 00 - 03:50 PM God created evolution, right? I love this discussion, but I might comment that we had better be more concerned about where we're going, given the environmental mess we've created as a race, than where we've come from. Created or evolved won't matter in the universe once we've killed ourselves by destroying our habitat. That said, study of evolution will help us understand better how to fix our trouble than the study of creation, that is, if one takes them as opposites (which I don't). If one accepts the idea that we've been created through evolutionary forces, with or without the hand of (a) God, then maybe the compromise position exists. It does for me, and I do consider myself Christian. Oh yeah, and Spaw, I'm more worried about the Leafs today... Peace, Mooh. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Rich(bodhránai gan ciall) Date: 01 Oct 00 - 03:39 PM Let's see. Do I want to believe that I am the the handiwork of a supreme being that doesn't make mistakes..................Or do I want to believe I crawled out from under a rock in a swamp? Rich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: thosp Date: 01 Oct 00 - 03:16 PM Jon -- i agree - i bleive that it was Prometheus who was responsible for our modifacation -- and did he pay the price! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: thosp Date: 01 Oct 00 - 03:07 PM Spaw -- more to the point -- WHAT HAPPENED TO THE YANKEES!!!??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Jon Freeman Date: 01 Oct 00 - 03:03 PM OK, let's propose a theory here: Evolution seems to have some foundation but there is the missing link. How about aliens really exist, they visited this planet and that we were in fact genetically modified? Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: catspaw49 Date: 01 Oct 00 - 03:01 PM (:<)) Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: Gary T Date: 01 Oct 00 - 02:58 PM Spaw, quit trying to rile up our calm discussion with volatile, controversial issues like the Mets! It's all the self control I can muster not to rise to the bait and wade into that one. VBG, of course. (Point taken, though.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Creation v Evolution From: catspaw49 Date: 01 Oct 00 - 02:52 PM How 'bout them Mets? Spaw |