Evolutionary Science-v- Creationism

OnyxCougar · 12-28-2004, 11:55 AM

ok, lets look at the post.

First two paragraphs gives rates of accumulation and subduction, which you said you don't have a problem with the cites, so we'll assume that's correct.

Third paragraph, first sentence lists a posit of the evolutionary theory.

If the first two paragraphs (with cites) are correct, and the rates stayed the same, then the referenced posit of the evolutionary theory cannot be correct.
Would you agree with that?

edited from:
then the evolutionary theory cannot be correct
to
then the referenced posit of the evolutionary theory cannot be correct.

12-28-2004, 11:55 AM	#11
OnyxCougar Junior Master Dwellar Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Kingdom of Atlantia Posts: 2,979	ok, lets look at the post. First two paragraphs gives rates of accumulation and subduction, which you said you don't have a problem with the cites, so we'll assume that's correct. Third paragraph, first sentence lists a posit of the evolutionary theory. If the first two paragraphs (with cites) are correct, and the rates stayed the same, then the referenced posit of the evolutionary theory cannot be correct. Would you agree with that? edited from: then the evolutionary theory cannot be correct to then the referenced posit of the evolutionary theory cannot be correct. __________________ Impotentes defendere libertatem non possunt. "Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth." ~Franklin D. Roosevelt Last edited by OnyxCougar; 12-28-2004 at 12:02 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)