Changes

Conservapedia talk:Lenski dialog (view source)

Revision as of 15:22, June 24, 2008

1,251 bytes added , 15:22, June 24, 2008

Reply to Lenski's second-last paragraph

Line 919: Line 919:

:Well I don't know the details of the peer review process. I also dunno about anyone else. But I did get a chuckle out of his little anecdote. For what its worth, it lightened my mood after 38 hours without sleep, (recipe for regret, I don't recommend it). [[User:Bolly|Bolly]] 23:44, 24 June 2008

−

==~~Chuckle~~==

+

== Reply to Lenski's second-last paragraph ==

+

Dr. Lenski, I hope you get to read this.

+

I have no dispute with most of your second letter (or your first one), and you will note above my objections to the letters being sent to you, but do wish to respond to your second-last paragraph (the P.P.P.S.). You point out earlier in your letter than Andy Schlafly lacks expertise in the relevant fields, but you then proceed to pontificate on an area in which you appear to have no expertise, biblical [[exegesis]].

+

The main problem with your claim that God may have used evolution is not that He could not have, but that He said that he didn't (or, more precisely, what He said that He did is incompatible with evolution). What is "insulting to God" is rejecting what He has plainly told us that He did.

+

This point has been made over and over by creationists, so your lack of awareness of this demonstrates that you have little idea of what creationists actually claim and believe, yet it seems that you yourself are willing to go beyond your expertise when it suits you.

+

[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:22, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

+

P.S. Don't take too much notice of some of the messages posted above, a few of which are likely parodist troublemakers.

Philip J. Rayment

nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW

13,254

edits