Creationist Dr. Hovind Does Well On CJOB Today
casem at pangea.ca
Fri Nov 6 10:52:16 EST 1998
Your analogy does not apply, at all. One reason for saying this
is that quite a number of prominent evolutionists have listened to the
debate between evolutionists and creationists over the years and have found
the creationist arguments more scientifically sound. Many of our
creationists are former evolutionists and they will tell you that the
scientific footing is there for creationism and not for evolution.
Richard Lumbsden of Tulane University a world-renowned cell
biologist thought to debunk Dr. Duane Gish's presentation of creation
science. He is one who made the switch from evolution to creation and
the basis of a better and sounder science.
You've been listening to too much propaganda, if I may say so.
If you don't think that creationists abide by rules of logic then I
would have to conclude that you have not really listened to what they have
had to say.
> I think it is laughable that
> these "debates" are held between
> Creationists and scientists. It's
> like putting a wrestler in the ring
> with a basketball player. The two
> are playing different games
> according to different rules; how can
> either possibly win? Or lose?
> To clarify; scientists are bound
> by the rules of logic. Creationists
> are not. Whatever a creationists wants
> to be true, he can believe; whatever he
> does not want to be true, he can ignore.
> With a license like that, a Creationist
> can play a very enjoyable game. Bit it's
> not Science. So why get in the ring with
More information about the Bioforum