No, Bill Gates ! :)
Is that the revision that tells how the Sun, and all the heavens, goes
around the Earth?
Guy Avenell
www.hptraderonline.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Boyd" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: Ohio wants to teach "2001" in 2002 and beyond
> You're not trying to tell me that my first edition, leather bound, hand
> tipped, autographed Bible recently purchased on Ebay may be a fake; are
you?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Barnes [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 12:25 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: Ohio wants to teach "2001" in 2002 and beyond
>
> This reminds me of a newspaper article I read in high school (eon's ago).
> The article talked about an 'exciting new discovery' on a lake in Idaho or
> Montana. It was a dug-out Indian. It was sent to a neighboring
university
> for analysis. Carbon-dating was used to determine that the canoe was
> several thousand years old. I guess the article made headlines around the
> Northwest.
>
> A woman happened to read about this discovery and saw a picture of it in
her
> local newspaper. She went to the university and asked to meet with the
> professor doing the study. She showed him a picture of the same canoe and
> explained the canoe was made by her son who was in scouting at the time.
> There were distinct marks on the side of the canoe that validated her
story.
> Her son was studying Indian Lore and wanted to build a dug out canoe. He
> used some of the methods such as burning and chipping to hollow out the
log.
>
> So much for carbon-dating!
> Note:
> I can't remember if the canoe was discovered at a lake in Idaho and taken
to
> a university in Montana or the other way around. The woman lived in the
> state where the canoe was discovered.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~```
> read another interesting book on this subject the other month.
>
> A theory is something via testing you can either prove or disprove.
>
> Since the earth is either billions or ~6000 years old depending on what
you
> believe, No one was around to observe the birth of the earth that is
still
> living, and there has been enough change to make most forms of testing
> questionable (has the decay of various isotopes (carbon) been constant or
> variable over 6000 or billions of years ?), the author's premise is what
> "MODEL" of what we can observe today best matches either evolution or
> creation.
>
> IE does the first and second law of theromdynamics match the evolution
MODEL
> or creation MODEL ?
>
> Does the finding of dinosaur fossils match an evolution MODEL or
> creation/flood MODEL ?
>
> There was a good 25/30 questions along this line with discussions about
> beliefs of both camps as it relates.
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
