That is where some people are confused by the noiseI think and some
people just have a fundamentalist axe to grind. One is a belief based
on scripture and and magical thinking while the other is the best
estimate based on evidence gathered by many generations of
researchers. They are not equivalent at all and the science is
subject to change should more evidence require it. For example it was
thought until recently that people were in the New World only since
the land bridge at the end of the last ice age about 12,000 years ago
and now recent evidence is being tested that indicates that
occupation here is much older, in the neighborhood of 20,000 years
ago. I think the Shakespeare quote is apt:
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt
of in your philosophy."
--From Hamlet (I, v, 166-167)
I think I am going to abandon this thread. It can just lead to hurt
feelings. No need to cheer. For anyone who wants to communicate
further, off list is good for me.
Eyes wide open as I can make them.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Feb 26, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Wayne Culberson wrote:
> Whatever you believe about the age of the earth, it is at best a
> faith-based
> belief. Science can only deal with what is observable and
> repeatable, and
> that will forever leave out the distant past or origins of our
> universe from
> the realms of true science.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|