Message: previous - next
Month: June 2018

got a puzzle OT - The last chapter

From: Kate Draven <borglabs4@...>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 01:35:07 -0400
Now then lads, it's time to come to a full stop.
Tomorrow it's back to the business of building the world's greatest GUI.
Now off to bed with the lot of you!

Gn to all


> I did not answer at first because I think everyone is free to believe or no=
> t,=20
> but this time too much is simply wrong.
> On Wednesday 20 June 2018 02.31:18 Felix Miata wrote:
> > It's not a versus. Evolution IS a religion:
> It's definitely  *not*
> >
> > ...
> > 2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed
> > upon by a number of persons or sects:...
> >
> > "Evolution", as taught, is not subject to proof.
> This is wrong. Just as some may kill member of other religions although the=
> irs=20
> tell them not to, I can't make sure that there are not some who "teach"=20
> evolution as a religion, but evolution is a *theory*, that itself has evolv=
> ed=20
> once first proposed. It has evolved because scientific evidence has showed=
> =20
> that proposed explanations did not fit to facts
> > As taught it's all based=20
> > on theories, aka beliefs.=20
> Wrong again. A theory is driven by *facts*. It's a model that needs to be=20
> modified if it's not able to explain new facts that are discoverd.=20
> > Micro-evolution is without question real and=20
> > provable, but micro-evolution is not taught as distinguishable from the
> > other 6 types of unprovable evolution, such as that which says dinosaurs
> > and man did not coexist.
> This simply comes from the fact that datation methods (which by the way use=
> =20
> the same physics that are used in CERN to improve another model, which trie=
> s=20
> to explain how matter is made) show that dinosaurs disappeared 65 millions=
> =20
> years ago while man in its modern form is some two million years old.
> That's as if you said it is unprovable that I could not meet Darwin.
> > Technically, it's arguably true that dinosaurs=20
> > didn't, because "dinosaur" is a word originally created during the 19th
> > century. Before then, the creatures since referred to as dinosaurs were
> > called dragons, and there has been found much art on the walls of caves a=
> nd
> > elsewhere created many tens of centuries ago that indicate man was
> > interacting with living dragons.
> =46rom which not a single bone has ever been found. My daughter draws a lot=
> =20
> of "animals" that have never existed, and never will exit. (I admit she doe=
> s=20
> not draw on a cave).
> > > then I think (or maybe, I believe) that we need to start
> > > another thread, if not indeed a separate forum, list, or whatever.
> True. I doubt TDE will ever "evolve" to clear this sort of things :)
> > One of my reasons to reply was to highlight the unending inane off-topic
> > threads about coffee, chocolate & dinosaurs polluting this list and its
> > archive. If dinosaurs are OK, then anything should go. I'd like to see OT
> > stuff keep to a minimum or less.
> =2D-=20
> Prie Dieu mais continue de nager vers le rivage.
> (proverbe russe)
> Pray to God but continue to swim to the shore.
> (Russian proverb)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> Read list messages on the web archive:
> Please remember not to top-post: