Back To The Future?

[JinnRikki]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]SCIENCE – THANK GOD FOR THE GRAND CANYON: In National Park Service (NPS) affiliated bookstores at Grand Canyon National Park, visitors can now "find literature informing them that the great chasm…was formed about 4,500 years ago, a direct consequence of Noah's Flood." Indeed, this is "the ill-informed premise of 'Grand Canyon, a Different View,' a handsomely-illustrated volume written by Tom Vail, who with his wife operates Canyon Ministries, conducting creationist-view tours of the canyon." Pro-science groups tried to get the book pulled off the shelf, noting it was "based on a specific religious doctrine" and should not be promoted by the state, but they were "overruled by NPS headquarters, which announced that a high-level policy review of the matter would be launched." To date, Grand Canyon National Park no longer offers an official estimate of the age of the canyon, and the NPS has blocked publication of guidance intended for park rangers that reminds them there is no scientific basis for creationism.[/font]

American Progrees Action Fund

 

[bblight]

So?

 

[petre]

rhe united states was founded as a secular republic, founded on reason, with a belief in science, implicitly rejecting the voodoo of religion, mr. papist..

 

[christof]

rhe united states was founded as a secular republic, founded on reason, with a belief in science, implicitly rejecting the voodoo of religion, mr. papist..

Huh?

The founders of the U.S. were very religous. They did no such thing as "reject the voodoo of religion". They purposely limited the governments ability to sponsor or meddle with religion, in response to the persecution they fled from in Europe.

 

[xpanda]

I have a question for both the secularists and the religious types: why is it assumed that science and religion do not mix, that it must be one or the other?

My uncle, the priest, and I used to talk about this alot, as I majored in anthropology and he majored in theology.

Assume for a minute that when the bible was written there was no access to fossil digs or archaeological finds. Assume also, that even if this ability did exist, that the science to prove the age of said findings definitely did not exist. (In other words, a bone could be found, but nobody would be able to tell that it was 40,000, rather than 400 years old.) Hence the believability of the story of Adam and Eve.

Neither the theory of evolution, nor of the Big Bang, in any way writes off the theory of creation. Neither theory explains the first instance of life on earth, as a single-celled organism. It could still well be that god put this first organism on earth, and shaped its evolution into various species along the way, hominids being the most dominant in time.

Specifically, the theory that Noah put two of every animal onto a boat is a bit exaggerated for the average mind, don't you think? I don't advocate banning this theory (why would anyone advocating banning a topic of conversation?) but certainly I'm inclined to think that anyone who believes the story is far too gullible. To each his own, I suppose.

The creationists and the scientists need to stop yelling at one another, however, and understand that neither of their theories cancel out the others' -- nobody has a monopoly on the truth of how we got here.

 

[Cujo]

xpanda,

To complicate matters further, Noah actually was told to put clean animals by 7's and unclean animals by 2's into the Ark.

 

[Marco]

I'm guessing that the lions and all the other predatory animals, instinctual carnivores, all got along confined together and turned vegetarian for the trip just to be sure there would be some chickens and rabbits for future generations.

How thoughtful of them.

 

[xpanda]

I'm guessing that the lions and all the other predatory animals, instinctual carnivores, all got along confined together and turned vegetarian for the trip just to be sure there would be some chickens and rabbits for future generations.

How thoughtful of them.

And what about the humans? Did Noah bring a bunch of people, too?

From a population of 2 to 6 billion in 4500 hundred years. Wow, us humans are extraordinary, eh?

 

[bblight]

Again, so what?

Why are you so upset about this? Do you also get upset when the aclu prevents a nativity scene from being placed on town property? Or does it just bother you when it's just a religious point of view that you see?

 

[xpanda]

Again, so what?

Why are you so upset about this? Do you also get upset when the aclu prevents a nativity scene from being placed on town property? Or does it just bother you when it's just a religious point of view that you see?

Are you asking me this question?

If so, you'll note above I say 'to each his own' and 'why would anyone advocate banning a topic of conversation?' I'm not upset that people believe in Noah and blah blah, I just think it's a reflection of their level of education and/or cognitive reasoning, is all.

Same goes for people who believe in psychics, astrology, Buddha, palm readers, Moses, etc.

I'm a big believer in evidence.