AW: [meteorite-list] Fwd: More on the creationists at theMeteoriteFestival

From: Martin Altmann <altmann_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Mon Jul 10 07:54:11 2006
Message-ID: <015801c6a417$8b6f7b60$4f41fea9_at_name86d88d87e2>

Hi Rob,

And Einstein said smth about relativity...
There exist a quote, in various versions, of Einstein:
"Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit
with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute."

Religion is a matter of faith and not of science, unfortunately science
itself often enough too...
So leave the creationists alone, you can't convince them
and honestly, the question whether the Earth has an age of 6000 or
4.6billion years has no effects of our day-by-day-life, nor wether someone
is a good or bad boy. I see the problem in another way, fanatics exist on
both sides, if they could learn a little bit more tolerance, things would be
easier...

If I would be condemned to watch the Italian soccer team play for 6000
years, it would be like 4.6 billion years for me, if I would have to watch
the German team playing for 4.6billion years, it would seem to me to be 6000
years.
So there the meteoricists can meet with the creationists.
If they are buying their Brenhams and believe that they are only a few years
old, I guess then Mr.Stimpson or the real Steve Arnold, wouldn't try to
convince them, that they are older than their Earth, hehe.

Buckleboo!
Martin
 
  
-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com
[mailto:meteorite-list-bounces_at_meteoritecentral.com] Im Auftrag von Rob
McCafferty
Gesendet: Montag, 10. Juli 2006 12:44
An: meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
Betreff: RE: [meteorite-list] Fwd: More on the creationists at
theMeteoriteFestival

There are more than one
"branch"-or-whatever-it's-called- of creationist.
Some acknowledge that the time period for creation is
not literally 7 days accept evolution and say that the
only important thing is that it was all begun by God.
There are some who hold a far more fundamental view
which says that everything in the bible must be taken
literally. This is difficult to have sympathy with for
anyone who's familiar with the concept of "chinese
whispers". Even if God Himself were to give a full and
frank account of creation at the dawn of humanity
-which i doubt- it'd inevitably change over the
millenia as it is writte, re-written, told, retold and
translated.
I suppose it is just possible that everything was
created 4000 years ago or something and all the
evidence to the contrary is a fabrication created by
God to test our faith. (Now that's what I call
clutching at straws)
Surely a God who created a universe 13.7bn ya with
such intricacy, subtlty and let it run its course to
the present while we struggle to undertand it...well
that's not only more likely, but cleverer more
beautiful and simple. (The word simple is not meant to
be taken literally).
Science and religion are not mutually exclusive.
Einstein, was a firm believer is creation, that
physics is an attempt to see how God put everything
together.
Must be careful. This is a sensitive subject for
people on both sides of the argument. I hope I didn't
offend anyone as it was not my intention. Just my
thoughts on the matter.

Rob McCafferty



--- MARK BOSTICK <thebigcollector_at_msn.com> wrote:

> Hello All,
>
> The Creation Research Society.....is different, or
> least was at the
> festival.
>
> I did not look into them to know exactly where they
> stand on everything. It
> was obvious their thoughts on the origin of man, but
> age....such as the
> writer is talking about....it was less clear.
>
> It does not appear the writer looked into exactly
> where they stand either,
> as their displays acknowledged evolution. There was
> models of several of
> different periods of human skulls. I thought I
> would see the ages on them
> spaced neatly into a 5,000 year period...or the
> like, but interestingly, the
> oldest they had dated was 1.9 million years old. I
> did not look at them
> close enough to see if that was what they thought as
> the earliest man or
> not. (Such was not my goal at the festival).
>
> It appeared to me, they had their own definition of
> creationism. Or it was
> one I had never seen before. To bad the writer
> didn't contact the source he
> has wrote so much about on his website. Would have
> liked to have seen
> exactly where the Creation Research Society lies. I
> will note I do agree
> with most of the writers blogging.
>
> Clear Skies,
> Mark Bostick
> Kansas Meteorite Society
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
>
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Mon 10 Jul 2006 07:54:00 AM PDT