[geocentrism] Re: MS illogic

  • From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:41:31 -0700 (PDT)

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


Other related posts: