Re: SCIENTIFIC CREATIONISTS

[REBEL JOE]

as for me I belive in god end of story



http://community.webtv.net/rebeljoe/POND

[Ka30P]

In the beginning there was water,
then God made some land
and that's where the trouble began.

You can't combine a dinosaur
and a man,
Man took one look at the brontosaur
and ran!

So someone had to go.
God turned the dinosaurs
to fossils
thus rendering them quite docile,
and gave man the run of the land,
for better or worse
we'll leave that for another verse.


kathy :-)
<A HREF="http://www.onceuponapond.com/">Once upon a pond</A>

[Ka30P]

In the beginning there was water,
then God made some land
and that's where the trouble began.

You can't combine a dinosaur
and a man,
Man took one look at the brontosaur
and ran!

So someone had to go.
God turned the dinosaurs
to fossils
thus rendering them quite docile,
and gave man the run of the land,
for better or worse
we'll leave that for another verse.


kathy :-)
<A HREF="http://www.onceuponapond.com/">Once upon a pond</A>

[Moontanman]

>I. The Creation/Evolution debate is two separate debates.
>

You are pretty good at the old "if you can't Dazzle them with brilliance Baffle
them with bull****" credo but SCIENTIFIC CREATIONIST is an oxymoron.


Moon

[Moontanman]

>I. The Creation/Evolution debate is two separate debates.
>

You are pretty good at the old "if you can't Dazzle them with brilliance Baffle
them with bull****" credo but SCIENTIFIC CREATIONIST is an oxymoron.


Moon

[Moontanman]

>
>is there any lifeform on the planet that has perfect genetic replication?
>

No

[Moontanman]

>
>is there any lifeform on the planet that has perfect genetic replication?
>

No

[Moontanman]

>
>I know evolutionists have abandoned hope of ever explaining
>the origin of life, it is time to realize that life involves
>many complexities that can not be resolved by random selection
>or any other type of sucessive approximation. Some problems
>demand descrimination and insight.
>

You don't have a clue as to what you are talking about. All you have is the
lies, half truths, and rhetoric supplied by your religion which has no basis in
reality at all. Only belief in lies, lack of belief in evolution will never
change the facts. The origin of life has been explained many years ago. Idiot
creationists just don't want to acknowledge they are out of the loop. Life is a
natural process that takes place where ever the chemical environment has enough
energy sources with a liquid to dissolve those sources. Bacteria and archaea
evolved from non living auto catalysts deep in the earth using hydrocarbons and
oxides of metals that are out of chemical equilibrium and certain non metals as
a source of energy to drive the auto catalysts reaction. Life evolved at the
edge of energy flowing up from the earth along with hydrogen, hydrocarbons, and
other gases and water. I won't even attempt to explain complex processes to a
troll but the reason Darwin's book was called origin of species instead of
origin of life was that he didn't know about the processes that catalyzed life.
All he knew was that species change over time. He didn't have the equipment or
the knowledge to go further so being a good scientist he didn't make claims he
couldn't substantiate. Unlike Creationists who will claim anything to prove an
insupportable point. Shame on you, lying is a sin and so is trying to make God
fit inside your own small box like mind. God is greater than your creationists
can conceive of so they try to stuff him inside a box small enough for them to
wrap their tiny minds around. Creationist do their level best to take away from
the glory of God, it's really a shame. God made the universe so that something
as wonderful as life comes about naturally were ever the right conditions
exist. The right conditions are far greater than just the surface of our earth
and encompass probably ten planets and moons in just our solar system at least.
Earths surface life is just a tiny subset of what life is and can be. Run back
to the blasphemy your church spouts, maybe God will forgive you for being so
small minded and unwilling to believe in his true greatness.

Moon

[Moontanman]

>
>I know evolutionists have abandoned hope of ever explaining
>the origin of life, it is time to realize that life involves
>many complexities that can not be resolved by random selection
>or any other type of sucessive approximation. Some problems
>demand descrimination and insight.
>

You don't have a clue as to what you are talking about. All you have is the
lies, half truths, and rhetoric supplied by your religion which has no basis in
reality at all. Only belief in lies, lack of belief in evolution will never
change the facts. The origin of life has been explained many years ago. Idiot
creationists just don't want to acknowledge they are out of the loop. Life is a
natural process that takes place where ever the chemical environment has enough
energy sources with a liquid to dissolve those sources. Bacteria and archaea
evolved from non living auto catalysts deep in the earth using hydrocarbons and
oxides of metals that are out of chemical equilibrium and certain non metals as
a source of energy to drive the auto catalysts reaction. Life evolved at the
edge of energy flowing up from the earth along with hydrogen, hydrocarbons, and
other gases and water. I won't even attempt to explain complex processes to a
troll but the reason Darwin's book was called origin of species instead of
origin of life was that he didn't know about the processes that catalyzed life.
All he knew was that species change over time. He didn't have the equipment or
the knowledge to go further so being a good scientist he didn't make claims he
couldn't substantiate. Unlike Creationists who will claim anything to prove an
insupportable point. Shame on you, lying is a sin and so is trying to make God
fit inside your own small box like mind. God is greater than your creationists
can conceive of so they try to stuff him inside a box small enough for them to
wrap their tiny minds around. Creationist do their level best to take away from
the glory of God, it's really a shame. God made the universe so that something
as wonderful as life comes about naturally were ever the right conditions
exist. The right conditions are far greater than just the surface of our earth
and encompass probably ten planets and moons in just our solar system at least.
Earths surface life is just a tiny subset of what life is and can be. Run back
to the blasphemy your church spouts, maybe God will forgive you for being so
small minded and unwilling to believe in his true greatness.

Moon

[Moontanman]

>
>Ponds are small ecosystems that have to be maintain by an outside influence.
>what would happen if an artifical pond gets abandoned? will the koi evolve?
>

Actually if the pond is big enough to sustain the population as a breeding
population they will evolve and quite quickly. I just a few generations you
will no longer have the fancy brightly colored koi just carp evolved to survive
in the environment they are stuck in. Give it up, you are out of your league.

Moon

[Moontanman]

>
>Ponds are small ecosystems that have to be maintain by an outside influence.
>what would happen if an artifical pond gets abandoned? will the koi evolve?
>

Actually if the pond is big enough to sustain the population as a breeding
population they will evolve and quite quickly. I just a few generations you
will no longer have the fancy brightly colored koi just carp evolved to survive
in the environment they are stuck in. Give it up, you are out of your league.

Moon

[[email protected]]

the hallmark of pseudoscience is the conclusion is written in stone and cannot be
questioned nor proven false. therefore only "facts" or beliefs that agree with the
conclusion are gathered and used, all other facts are dismissed and ignored.
2. it is pointless to discuss facts with people who "believe". Beliefs are not
debatable.
Ingrid


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[[email protected]]

the hallmark of pseudoscience is the conclusion is written in stone and cannot be
questioned nor proven false. therefore only "facts" or beliefs that agree with the
conclusion are gathered and used, all other facts are dismissed and ignored.
2. it is pointless to discuss facts with people who "believe". Beliefs are not
debatable.
Ingrid


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[Ash]

jrh wrote:

> In article -amikchi>, -amikchi
> says...
>
>
>>On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 23:00:15 +0000 in episode
>><3mHbc.148712$cx5.31998@fed1read04> we saw our hero (jrh):
>
>
>>>In article -amikchi>,
-amikchi says...
>
>
>
>>>>On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 08:06:41 +0000 in episode
>>>><lgubc.139981$cx5.26719@fed1read04> we saw our hero (jrh):
>>>>
>>>>>In article -amikchi>,
-amikchi says...
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 20:01:27 +0000 in episode
>>>>>><rEjbc.112155$cx5.3141@fed1read04> we saw our hero (jrh):
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In article >,
>>>>>>>says...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Jabriol wrote:
>
>
>
>>>>>>>>>From thier point of view the Bible book of Genesis, the universe
>>>>>>>>>was created by God less than ten thousand years ago.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>><clip>
>
>
>
>>>>>>>>First, evolution has nothing whatsoever to say concerning the
>>>>>>>>creation of the universe or the Earth. It is only concerned with
>>>>>>>>what happens to life once it exists.
>
>
>
>>>>>>>that's why Darwins book was titled "ORIGIN of Species"
>
>
>
>>>>>>Yes. Exactly.
>
>
>
>>>>>One could argue the airplane "evolved" from a car or from a man or from
>>>>>mankind. If the framework excluded creativity and tried to make the
>>>>>case using economic forces or survival it would be inadequate. The
>>>>>same is true of the origin of life or the origin of species, what ever
>>>>>it means, because the simplest form of life, is unquestionably more
>>>>>complex than the most complex airplane.
>
>
>
>>>>>I know evolutionists have abandoned hope of ever explaining the origin
>>>>>of life, it is time to realize that life involves many complexities
>>>>>that can not be resolved by random selection or any other type of
>>>>>sucessive approximation. Some problems demand descrimination and
>>>>>insight.
>
>
>
>>>>You still don't get it. Evolution has never, at any point, not once,
>>>>ever been a theory of explanation of the origin of *LIFE.*
>
>
>
>>>I just stipulated the scope of evolution has been narrowed, or for all I
>>>care never did include the origin of "life". Why don't you address the
>>>fact there are problems in origin of species to complex to be solved by
>>>random activity?
>
>
>>The "scope" has never been "narrowed." The origin of life is a red herring
>>and irrelevant.
>
>
> Then why continue to bring it up and ignore the problem of
> complexity in the origin of a species?
>
>
>>I have no interest in trying to explain the mountains of evidence
>>to some ignorant on Usenet.
>
>
> What evidence can you give showing there are no problems
> involved in the origin of a species that can not be solved by
> a mindless process?
>
> <clip>
>
>>>>It's a sign of utter, abysmal ignorance to say "...evolutionists have
>>>>abandoned hope of ever explaining the origin of life..." It's indication
>>>>you flat do NOT know what you're talking about.
>
>
>
>>>Are you saying evolutionist still hope to come up with something or not?
>
>
>>It is, and always has been, irrelevant to the ToE.
>
> Which theory, or is there only one?
>
>
>>>Do you as an evolutionist believe that chemicals evolved into the the
>>>first cell, or was the first cell created?
>
>
>>No "explanation" is necessary. The ToE *begins with life and
>>explains something I don't think you understand to begin with.
>
>
> I understand that everything changes over time. What is being
> debated is what caused the different species to be formed.
> For the third time, I don't care if evolutionists never
> believed the cell evolved from a chemical stew. Perhaps
> you could explain the roots of that "myth" and show
> how it was fabricated by creationists trying to undermine
> evolutionism.
>
> Isn't "evolution" a theory or a belief that undirected selective
> process and mutations in the genetic information that controls
> the cells are the cause of cells becoming species,
> and species transforming into other species?
>
>
>>Abiogenesis is where the origin of *life is being explored.
>>And the answer to "how did life begin" is, at this moment:
>
>
>>"We don't know."
>
>
> And evolution is not known to be true, it is only a theory
> or set of theories, the best attempt by persons with a
> certain point of view to organize and make sense of information
> gathered from a wide range of sciences.

Only if the point of view is that the evidence should be support the
theory.

> Evolutionism has reached a dead end that anyone with an open
> mind could see if they would take the time to look. This
> is a truth those who believe evolutionist theory can not be wrong
> will never be able to see.
>
This is common creationist propoganda, accepted only by the ignorant.
The fact is that the vast majority of people who work or study in
biology and are actually exposed to and understand the facts accept the
evidence


--
#1636
Not BAAWA

[Ash]

jrh wrote:

> In article -amikchi>, -amikchi
> says...
>
>
>>On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 23:00:15 +0000 in episode
>><3mHbc.148712$cx5.31998@fed1read04> we saw our hero (jrh):
>
>
>>>In article -amikchi>,
-amikchi says...
>
>
>
>>>>On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 08:06:41 +0000 in episode
>>>><lgubc.139981$cx5.26719@fed1read04> we saw our hero (jrh):
>>>>
>>>>>In article -amikchi>,
-amikchi says...
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Fri, 02 Apr 2004 20:01:27 +0000 in episode
>>>>>><rEjbc.112155$cx5.3141@fed1read04> we saw our hero (jrh):
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In article >,
>>>>>>>says...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Jabriol wrote:
>
>
>
>>>>>>>>>From thier point of view the Bible book of Genesis, the universe
>>>>>>>>>was created by God less than ten thousand years ago.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>><clip>
>
>
>
>>>>>>>>First, evolution has nothing whatsoever to say concerning the
>>>>>>>>creation of the universe or the Earth. It is only concerned with
>>>>>>>>what happens to life once it exists.
>
>
>
>>>>>>>that's why Darwins book was titled "ORIGIN of Species"
>
>
>
>>>>>>Yes. Exactly.
>
>
>
>>>>>One could argue the airplane "evolved" from a car or from a man or from
>>>>>mankind. If the framework excluded creativity and tried to make the
>>>>>case using economic forces or survival it would be inadequate. The
>>>>>same is true of the origin of life or the origin of species, what ever
>>>>>it means, because the simplest form of life, is unquestionably more
>>>>>complex than the most complex airplane.
>
>
>
>>>>>I know evolutionists have abandoned hope of ever explaining the origin
>>>>>of life, it is time to realize that life involves many complexities
>>>>>that can not be resolved by random selection or any other type of
>>>>>sucessive approximation. Some problems demand descrimination and
>>>>>insight.
>
>
>
>>>>You still don't get it. Evolution has never, at any point, not once,
>>>>ever been a theory of explanation of the origin of *LIFE.*
>
>
>
>>>I just stipulated the scope of evolution has been narrowed, or for all I
>>>care never did include the origin of "life". Why don't you address the
>>>fact there are problems in origin of species to complex to be solved by
>>>random activity?
>
>
>>The "scope" has never been "narrowed." The origin of life is a red herring
>>and irrelevant.
>
>
> Then why continue to bring it up and ignore the problem of
> complexity in the origin of a species?
>
>
>>I have no interest in trying to explain the mountains of evidence
>>to some ignorant on Usenet.
>
>
> What evidence can you give showing there are no problems
> involved in the origin of a species that can not be solved by
> a mindless process?
>
> <clip>
>
>>>>It's a sign of utter, abysmal ignorance to say "...evolutionists have
>>>>abandoned hope of ever explaining the origin of life..." It's indication
>>>>you flat do NOT know what you're talking about.
>
>
>
>>>Are you saying evolutionist still hope to come up with something or not?
>
>
>>It is, and always has been, irrelevant to the ToE.
>
> Which theory, or is there only one?
>
>
>>>Do you as an evolutionist believe that chemicals evolved into the the
>>>first cell, or was the first cell created?
>
>
>>No "explanation" is necessary. The ToE *begins with life and
>>explains something I don't think you understand to begin with.
>
>
> I understand that everything changes over time. What is being
> debated is what caused the different species to be formed.
> For the third time, I don't care if evolutionists never
> believed the cell evolved from a chemical stew. Perhaps
> you could explain the roots of that "myth" and show
> how it was fabricated by creationists trying to undermine
> evolutionism.
>
> Isn't "evolution" a theory or a belief that undirected selective
> process and mutations in the genetic information that controls
> the cells are the cause of cells becoming species,
> and species transforming into other species?
>
>
>>Abiogenesis is where the origin of *life is being explored.
>>And the answer to "how did life begin" is, at this moment:
>
>
>>"We don't know."
>
>
> And evolution is not known to be true, it is only a theory
> or set of theories, the best attempt by persons with a
> certain point of view to organize and make sense of information
> gathered from a wide range of sciences.

Only if the point of view is that the evidence should be support the
theory.

> Evolutionism has reached a dead end that anyone with an open
> mind could see if they would take the time to look. This
> is a truth those who believe evolutionist theory can not be wrong
> will never be able to see.
>
This is common creationist propoganda, accepted only by the ignorant.
The fact is that the vast majority of people who work or study in
biology and are actually exposed to and understand the facts accept the
evidence


--
#1636
Not BAAWA

[Moontanman]

>
>Let 'Swine" not be taken negative, just a term for one not "evolved"
>enough to be able to handle reality. That's you, oh knuckle-dragger.
>

What is really scary is this guy might at some point be responsible for
deciding what type of cirriculum real students will have to study leaving them
totally unprepared for the real world.

Moon

[Moontanman]

>
>Let 'Swine" not be taken negative, just a term for one not "evolved"
>enough to be able to handle reality. That's you, oh knuckle-dragger.
>

What is really scary is this guy might at some point be responsible for
deciding what type of cirriculum real students will have to study leaving them
totally unprepared for the real world.

Moon

[Ash]

jrh wrote:

> In article >,
> says...
>
> <clipitall>
>
> ECC's in computer processes are used to make imperfect information
> perfect. No one with any understanding of computer science
> would ever believe programs could evolve into better programs because
> of random errors.
>
> The only reason life survives is because the genetic code has
> many different ECC's operating that correct damaged information,
> and make it "perfect". When the damage can not be corrected,
> illness or death follow.

Did someone actually tell you this or did you make it up yourself? A
lot of damae can be ignored, indeed some damage to the DNA does not
alter th eprotein at all


> Once cells acquire the ability to support intellegence, the
> attributes of God can enter into any cellular system and control
> the process from within. The manifistation of consciousness
> and intellegence within the biosphere is an established fact.
>
> The belief that man arrose from mindless slime is an
> anti-intellectual superstition, devised by an evil spirit
> and spread by usefull idiots, so that many might be enslaved
> to it's will.
>
Those paragraphs seem to coontradict each other. In the first, you say
cells have acquired intelligence, in the second you say it can't have
evolved


--
#1636
Not BAAWA

[Ash]

jrh wrote:

> In article >,
> says...
>
> <clipitall>
>
> ECC's in computer processes are used to make imperfect information
> perfect. No one with any understanding of computer science
> would ever believe programs could evolve into better programs because
> of random errors.
>
> The only reason life survives is because the genetic code has
> many different ECC's operating that correct damaged information,
> and make it "perfect". When the damage can not be corrected,
> illness or death follow.

Did someone actually tell you this or did you make it up yourself? A
lot of damae can be ignored, indeed some damage to the DNA does not
alter th eprotein at all


> Once cells acquire the ability to support intellegence, the
> attributes of God can enter into any cellular system and control
> the process from within. The manifistation of consciousness
> and intellegence within the biosphere is an established fact.
>
> The belief that man arrose from mindless slime is an
> anti-intellectual superstition, devised by an evil spirit
> and spread by usefull idiots, so that many might be enslaved
> to it's will.
>
Those paragraphs seem to coontradict each other. In the first, you say
cells have acquired intelligence, in the second you say it can't have
evolved


--
#1636
Not BAAWA

[Moontanman]

>Subject: Re: SCIENTIFIC CREATIONISTS
>

Again the term is an oxymoron, you are a troll and the only flaw in evolution
is that is produces dead ends like you. Do all Jehovia witneses act like you?
If so than next time they come around I won't be polite I'll run them off my
propertyand press trepassing charges. You obviously came from the shallow end
of the gene pool. You are too stupid to even argue your own point. What is it
about evolution that bother you the most? That you might be some how related to
a monkey (that's obvious so it must not be a problem) Personally I think that
evolution insults the monkeys if you are suppooed to be superior to them. Why
don't you go out and earn the darwin award for the year. I know it would be a
challenge for someone with your mental capasity.Do humanity a favor, don't
reproduce. I never realized they made IQ numbers in negatives. I bet you are
the life of the party, oops I forgot your religion doesn't party, doesn't
slaute the flag, celibrate Christs birthday or have sex except to procreate. No
wonder you are in such a bad mood. Were you born a Jehovia's witness or did
they convert you? I wonder if they would now that they know what they got.

Moon

[Moontanman]

>Subject: Re: SCIENTIFIC CREATIONISTS
>

Again the term is an oxymoron, you are a troll and the only flaw in evolution
is that is produces dead ends like you. Do all Jehovia witneses act like you?
If so than next time they come around I won't be polite I'll run them off my
propertyand press trepassing charges. You obviously came from the shallow end
of the gene pool. You are too stupid to even argue your own point. What is it
about evolution that bother you the most? That you might be some how related to
a monkey (that's obvious so it must not be a problem) Personally I think that
evolution insults the monkeys if you are suppooed to be superior to them. Why
don't you go out and earn the darwin award for the year. I know it would be a
challenge for someone with your mental capasity.Do humanity a favor, don't
reproduce. I never realized they made IQ numbers in negatives. I bet you are
the life of the party, oops I forgot your religion doesn't party, doesn't
slaute the flag, celibrate Christs birthday or have sex except to procreate. No
wonder you are in such a bad mood. Were you born a Jehovia's witness or did
they convert you? I wonder if they would now that they know what they got.

Moon

[Cybe R. Wizard]

Yea, verily, I say unto you that on this date (08 Apr 2004 01:26:23 GMT)
(Moontanman) didst appear within my Magick
Viewing Screen and, being somewhat pleasantly supplicatory, did
polemicize thusly:

> Do all Jehovia witneses act like you?
> If so than next time they come around I won't be polite I'll run them
> off my propertyand press trepassing charges.

Unfortunately, here in the USA, they, like politicians, have
Constitutional rights to harass you in your home. A much better tactic
is to tell them that you are Catholic*.

* or throw 'em in the pond

Cybe R. Wizard -remember, "...and by their works shall ye know them."
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[Cybe R. Wizard]

Yea, verily, I say unto you that on this date (08 Apr 2004 01:26:23 GMT)
(Moontanman) didst appear within my Magick
Viewing Screen and, being somewhat pleasantly supplicatory, did
polemicize thusly:

> Do all Jehovia witneses act like you?
> If so than next time they come around I won't be polite I'll run them
> off my propertyand press trepassing charges.

Unfortunately, here in the USA, they, like politicians, have
Constitutional rights to harass you in your home. A much better tactic
is to tell them that you are Catholic*.

* or throw 'em in the pond

Cybe R. Wizard -remember, "...and by their works shall ye know them."
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[[email protected]]

oooohhhhh.. a domey on the rec.ponds list??? Ingrid

(Moontanman) wrote:


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[[email protected]]

oooohhhhh.. a domey on the rec.ponds list??? Ingrid

(Moontanman) wrote:


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[DavesVideo]

Ron said:

>>A lot of stuff about SCIENTIFIC CREATIONISTS.>>

A nice topic to discuss on all of the crossposted groups with the exception
of this one.




Dave
http://members.tripod.com/~VideoDave

[Newbie Bill]

Thank you.

[bluegill phil]

Im with REBEL JOE

[Lieutenant Kizhe Katson]

(DavesVideo) wrote in message >...
> Ron said:
>
> >>A lot of stuff about SCIENTIFIC CREATIONISTS.>>
>
> A nice topic to discuss on all of the crossposted groups with the exception
> of this one.

Agreed. rec.ponds is one of the *last* places I ever expected (or
wanted) to see Jabriol -- one of the most evil and twisted b**t**ds
I've ever run across on the net.

-- Kizhe

[Jabriol]

(Lieutenant Kizhe Katson) wrote in message >...
> (DavesVideo) wrote in message >...
> > Ron said:
> >
> > >>A lot of stuff about SCIENTIFIC CREATIONISTS.>>
> >
> > A nice topic to discuss on all of the crossposted groups with the exception
> > of this one.
>
> Agreed. rec.ponds is one of the *last* places I ever expected (or
> wanted) to see Jabriol -- one of the most evil and twisted b**t**ds
> I've ever run across on the net.
>
> -- Kizhe

why thank you ;-)