Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (2424)	10/24/2000 12:36:05 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

"vertebrate" fossils? Do you even know what this means? "there should be some kind of predecessors to the vertebrate fossils" There are tons of invertebrate fossils Greg. Look up a word before you use it. It will make you appear a lot less ignorant. You might even want to learn a little bit more about fossils and earth science before you try to argue in this area. Clearly not an area you've any competence in at the moment.

To: Greg or e who wrote (2424)	10/24/2000 12:42:47 PM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

Re: Well, if that's the level of proof you demand, then I think you are establishing an unattainable standard. Okey-dokey! Forget about the wrist watch.... actually, a good ol' fob watch could fit the bill....

To: Greg or e who wrote (2424)	10/24/2000 12:45:53 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

Maybe if you date the fossils by the rocks they are found in and then date the rocks by the fossils found in the rocks that the fossils are found in, then you could just pick any date you felt like Greg, you are saying that there is no application of stratigraphic order in this stuff. I just walk over to a cliff and find a fossil, say it is Cambrian, even though it is sitting on top of whale fossils? Greg, that is hooey. In places where this happens there is other evidence of the true nature of the unconformity due to the presence of thrust faults or folding. There just aren't that many places on Earth where the fossil record is "upside down". In fact, they are, like you'd expect, exceedingly rare.

To: Greg or e who wrote (2424)	10/24/2000 12:49:47 PM
From: epicure	Respond to of 28931

>If you say evolution must be true because it is not possible that God exists, then the whole thing sounds more like philosophy than science to me. < Who said evolution MUST be true? I believe Mr. Jaeger merely said we would reconsider evolution. It's a THEORY Greg- no theory MUST be true, that's the whole point of calling them theories. When people feel things "must" be true they call them religions. I'm not aware of a Church of the Holy Evolution, are you? Perhaps science sounds more like philosophy to you because you do not understand either science or philosophy, and you get things all muddled.