Difference between revisions of "Talk:Creation scientist"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:Can we have some citations for the syllogism? I'd think the stated conclusion was actually a premise for many creationists. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 10:04, 19 March 2007 (EDT) | :Can we have some citations for the syllogism? I'd think the stated conclusion was actually a premise for many creationists. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 10:04, 19 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | ::I agree that the Bible is a matter of faith; creation scientists seem to disagree, seeking to prove the conclusion by science instead. Isn't that their whole ''raison d'etre''?--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 10:11, 19 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 14:11, March 19, 2007
This "syllogism" is fairly ridiculous, but since it is a true description of the topic, it should not be altered. I say ridiculous, because the Bible is a matter of Faith, not verifiable facts. Turing the hot light of scientific inquiry on the Bible would be disastrous for the Book.
Palmd001 10:02, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
- Can we have some citations for the syllogism? I'd think the stated conclusion was actually a premise for many creationists. Tsumetai 10:04, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
- I agree that the Bible is a matter of faith; creation scientists seem to disagree, seeking to prove the conclusion by science instead. Isn't that their whole raison d'etre?--AmesG 10:11, 19 March 2007 (EDT)