Evidently so, Do you really believe we possess any significant portion of all the knowledge in the universe? Science takes scattered facts, to create theories but then forgets that they're only theories and begins building further “facts” (theories) on top of other “facts” (theories).My opinion – Wm

Really… that's the best you can do?

The only way to keep the creation stories from being compatible with science, is to interpret them right out of shape.Wm

Quote (Stu @ Dec. 11 2012,15:11)Quote (seekingtruth @ Dec. 11 2012,12:41)The “evidence” hasn't changed since creation, why are “scientific conclusions” always changing… I assume you'll respond that new evidence bought science to an improved conclusion. Do you really think that the small percentage of knowledge that we possess, justifies such…[Read more]

The “evidence” hasn't changed since creation, why are “scientific conclusions” always changing… I assume you'll respond that new evidence bought science to an improved conclusion. Do you really think that the small percentage of knowledge that we possess, justifies such arrogance in scientific dogma?  Wm

T8,I would like the newer features I've seen, especially search features, but whatever works best for you.Wm

Keith,Good to see you, welcome back.Wm

Quote (t8 @ Dec. 08 2012,19:56)Not much content

Quote I fear that you are a much more mellow person than I will ever be.  Not really, I was much like you in my “youth” but 33 years of being a christian, during which I discovered my own arrogance and stubborn stupidity (not saying that about you) I suppose I have mellowed possibly even learned a little humility (not that I can brag about that,…[Read more]

Quote (Richtuner @ Nov. 28 2012,01:50)Well, this got off course…….again.Almost every thread I have been in or read it always come to this. Why can't we stay on the subject?Everybody comes up with the same scriptures and thoughts that echo through each post and thread.I don't want to get off myself, but let say this one thing:I MYSELF, AND I…[Read more]

The following are what I believe to be crackpot doctrines:Doctrines shaped by desiresDoctrines based on partial truthsDoctrines based on ignoranceDoctrines based on extremesDoctrines based on emotionsDoctrines based on snippets from scripture (ignoring the whole of scripture)Doctrines not based on scripture In my opinion – Wm

Mike,Please believe I did not write this with you in mind (though if I made a list I'm sure you would have been on it ). I feel compelled to remind myself and others not to take disagreements personally, to keep a loving attitude and an open mind, I believe truth will win out and those from the sidelines are encouraged more from truth presented…[Read more]

To All,Well seems most agree that there are “crackpot” ideas out there. I made the point that we assign them to others, since from our perspective (our understanding of scriptures, etc.) we are fit to judge what is actual truth. But I would declare that most of us have changed our positions on what's true over the years, most would say that they…[Read more]

Crackpottery is defined as “what others believe when they don't agree with me”

Hey Tim how are you doing,No I see it differently, I have more “proof” of God, than “proof” of Stu. You guys teach anything is possible, why shouldn't I believe Stu isn't just some random misfiring of bits, it's more plausible than all the complexities of life coming from nothing, now that truly is beyond absurd. Wm

You're my “imaginary friend” since you don't really exist.

Which imaginary friend would that be?

Seems to be.

Who has to pretend I'm just following the example you guy's have laid out that all things are possible no matter how absurd the odds.

Perhaps I should have said (ape in this case) but hey I guess I didn't stop to think that this random misfiring would manifest what appears to be a response, with what looks to be emotion.Still, this is far more likely, than for life to have come from nothing.