Yes, that was a good review......Of course the "real problem" all along has been with logic itself .....Scientist tired of contradictory data to their preconceptions have opted to attack logic itself rather then their preconceive ideas.....They prefer their vain imaginations over logic itself but want you to believe the are only being "objective" .................and they are........ by first attempting to redefine what "objective" means external of logic.......then when that does not work well..... just redefine what logic is! Robert Bennett <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx> wrote: The subject of contradictions used by mainstream science and their followers has been a topic explored on this forum previously. Coincidentally, the same topic arises in a book review ? also coincidentally - of GWW(fabp). The analysis of the problem and its purpose could easily have been written by yours truly. Now, if we could only get the world to listen ?.. to logic. the lines have been drawn http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1B6FV9E3RBND9/ref=cm_pdp_reviews_see_all/002-4731938-1340061?ie=UTF8&sort%5Fby=MostRecentReview top a logical farse http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1B6FV9E3RBND9/002-4731938-1340061?ie=UTF8&display=public&sort%5Fby=MostRecentReview&page=2 bottom ???.. Biblical revisionists scoff at discussing GS, which they claim has no moral importance and is a purely scientific issue. No one goes to Hell for a HC belief. The issue isn?t GS, per se, but the belief in Scriptural errancy. If GS is false?. what else in the Bible is? The same reviewer cites many quotes from varied sources that dismiss religion based on the alleged disproof of GS. If the issue isn?t worth discussing, why does it aris so often? Methinks they doth protest too much. a cross-section of the debate http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1B6FV9E3RBND9/ref=cm_pdp_reviews_see_all/002-4731938-1340061?ie=UTF8&sort%5Fby=MostRecentReview bottom Robert