[geocentrism] Re: excuse my paranoia
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "geocentrism list" <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 08:46:41 +1000
Quick interjection for Neville. and note I am speaking evolution per se, not
specifically organic evolution. Phil.
----- Original Message -----
From: Neville Jones
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 12:16 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: excuse my paranoia
Dear Philip,
I agree with Jack that organic evolution is not a viable alternative to
creation. Not in any way, shape or form.
See my subsequent explanation to Jack. Viability does not mean actual
...viable adjective
"able to work as intended or able to succeed:"
However, I want to pick up on the second thing you said, "the world has
existed no more than 10,000 years and probably less." Are you questioning the
Genesis record that allows us to estimate ~6,000 years for the age of the
universe? No I am not. I am merely using a nominal 10k as the upper limit
because differing researchers have no concensus .. You will note I have
mentioned 7,000 years.. Estimates vary.
In relation to this, I recall that someone resigned from ICR because of the
ages of some trees, as determined from their growth rings. Does anyone else
remember this and, if so, can they supply some meat on the bones, please?
Although I did once use the example of a 1000 year old tree in the garden of
Eden to support my contention that God created age, and not hollow trees, such
is just a minor point when one considers the sand in the rivers, the cliffs of
the gorge, the volcanoes raised from the sea, the light from far away galaxies,
et al which He created during the 6 days of creation. If you and Paul by some
means were transported to the world on the 7th day, I am sure you would both be
in complete agreement about the marvellous age of the world and the universe
encompassing it.. With you possessing revelation, and Paul not,
scientifically, based on observation, Paul still wins his case. Philip.
Neville
www.GeocentricUniverse.com
-----Original Message-----
From: jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 12:50:20 +0100
Dear Philip,
Of course I'm biased, but not against true science.
I don't understand your comment below. Your sure its a viable alternative?
It's not a viable alternative! If it were there would be no point in discussing
it!
Jack
----- Original Message -----
From: philip madsen
To: geocentrism list
Not me. I am absolutely certain that evolution is a viable alternative as
to how we arrived today. I just happen to know with certainty that it did not
happen that way, and that the world has existed no more than 10,000 years and
probably less.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get Free 5GB Email – Check out spam free email with many cool features!
Visit http://www.inbox.com/email to find out more!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.31/1031 - Release Date: 26/09/2007
12:12 PM
Other related posts:
