[geocentrism] Re: Intellectual dishonesty
- From: "Dr. Neville Jones" <ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Jack Lewis <jandj.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Philip <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Knarr, Ronald" <knarrrj@xxxxxxx>, "Jones, Steven" <stavro_jones@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Steve <ancient@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mike <geocentric@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 23:22:26 +0100 (BST)
I would like to thank Jack for this e-mail and for the attachment that came
with it. The article by Dr. Morris, whom I have great respect for (his
co-authored book, "The Genesis Flood," was the single most influential work
with me when I started investigating the creation science movement about seven
or eight years ago), was extremely well-written and eye-opening.
There is only one teacher - Christ. Mike is obviously a well-read man, who
knows some of the Gospels, but does not believe what he reads. He seems to have
left in disgust, because I will not "debate" certain things which have been
brought up. However, to give one example, I was asked for reasons why I am
convinced that no one has set foot upon the Moon. One of those reasons was the
supposed photographic record. I backed this up with the declaration that I have
extensive photographic experience with the type of camera and film supposedly
used on the Moon. The debate, however, just turned straight into contradiction,
with claims that this was "old hat" and had been "debunked."
Another example is that I am very well qualified to comment upon the claims
that laser beams have been bounced off an 18-inch square piece of aluminium,
supposedly left on the Moon by Armstrong and Aldrin. The people who moan that I
do not debate these claims are the very ones that immediately contradict them.
I am prepared to debate all day with those that are genuinely interested, but I
will not engage in juvenile contradiction to satisfy anyone's desire to defend
their atheistic position.
Mike, for instance, is welcome back on this forum if he wants, but the rules of
the game (in our case) is one subject and serious, reasoned debate, not simple
Monty Python contradiction.
Neville.
Jack Lewis <jandj.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 1:09 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Announcements
> Despite being an atheist I do agree with many of the new testament's
> christian ideals.
There are quite a number of atheists who believe in Christian morality
without wanting to acknowledge its origin. Rather having your cake and
eating it don't you think?! Don't you realise that if we all evolved where
does all this morality spring from? By what criteria are morals set? Where
is the morality in 'survival of the fittest? What is one man's moral is
another's barrier. How does one atheist know where he stands relative to
another atheist? By what criteria does an atheist tell his children that
something is 'wrong'. Christians at least believe in a moral absolute and
they know exactly where they stand relative to each other and do you know
what Mike it's an extremely comforting feeling.
>You, Dr Jones, as well as being completely
> unscientific and intellectually dishonest, are a most un-Christian man
> as well. It is a great shame that a man with your talents chooses to
> use his talents to distort and misrepresent the truth.
I would point out to you that I have sent you and others two e-mails with
attachments about the absurdity of evolution and its intellectual
dishonesty. These were scientific critiques of evolution's answer to life
from non-life. If you bother to read these attachments you will see that it
says very much the same thing as you say about Neville. In the face of
materialistic impossibility, evolutionists exhibit denial of the obvious in
the extreme. I challenge you to refute by whatever means you care to choose
the conclusion of these two articles. In a nutshell people who believe in
nothing will believe in anything!
>I gave you the
> benefit of doubt and assumed you were so blinded by faith that you
> didn't realise how hypocritical you were but banning someone who has
> made many good points that you have not answered on the basis that they
> won't go over debunked old-hat woo-woo garbage with you has removed that
> doubt.
I have attached a further article to this posting which will demonstrate
that evolutionists are not without exercising censorship. It's entitled
'Games Some People Play'
Well it's very simple Mike, you put up a good case for life from non-life
and I'll consider all the scientific 'facts' including their assumptions.
Until you are able to do this you are also part the intellectual dishonesty
that permeates science.
Finally, I would say that because you are an atheist it makes not the
slightest difference to you if the scientists are wrong - because its all
part of the 'onwards and upwards', the easy-come-easy go attitude of
science. But I would venture to say that it would make a great deal of
difference to you if creationist scientists are right!
Jack Lewis
---------------------------------
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
Other related posts:
