cyberjesus: not sure what you want to accomplish with a clear distortion, but it is not on-topic and quite frankly, it piss me off greatly when SOME theist rely on the same tactics.
Posts by bohm
-
52Good books against evolution?
by bohm inafter reading 'the greatest show on earth' by dawkins, i have been intrigued by how biblical literalists explain the many findings that seem to support evolution and contradict various parts of the bible.
in doing to i have browsed around on aig but i have generally felt let down by the quality of evidence and interpretations they present.
so i would like to ask all non-evolutionists: if i wanted to learn more about the physical case against evolution, what books should i read?
-
-
-
52
Good books against evolution?
by bohm inafter reading 'the greatest show on earth' by dawkins, i have been intrigued by how biblical literalists explain the many findings that seem to support evolution and contradict various parts of the bible.
in doing to i have browsed around on aig but i have generally felt let down by the quality of evidence and interpretations they present.
so i would like to ask all non-evolutionists: if i wanted to learn more about the physical case against evolution, what books should i read?
-
-
bohm
Farkel: Please explain, are you implying evolution cannot be disputed and therefore is not a scientific theory? do you imply a book that dispute evolution is automatically not good?
Cadellin: That is why i started this topic. Most anti-evolution arguments i am aware of have huge flaws, and therefore when they are debunked i often feel like i am a non-evolutionist who read a debunking of the piltdown-man or something like that. I was hoping to find a good, scientific book that presented a critical view on evolution without relying on distortions, creative quoting and other crappy AiG-like tactics.
-
52
Good books against evolution?
by bohm inafter reading 'the greatest show on earth' by dawkins, i have been intrigued by how biblical literalists explain the many findings that seem to support evolution and contradict various parts of the bible.
in doing to i have browsed around on aig but i have generally felt let down by the quality of evidence and interpretations they present.
so i would like to ask all non-evolutionists: if i wanted to learn more about the physical case against evolution, what books should i read?
-
-
bohm
PSacramento: I once saw an interview with a christian who said something along the lines: "I find it quite amazing some people want to turn the inspired word in the genesis into a simple 3rd grade science textbook, and thereby ignore the message it contain".
It is clear that if one say: "The bible says birds was created before land animals, so thats how it is" THEN that person make his interpretation of the bible and evidence for evolution (or rather, the current understanding of how things evolved on earth) mutually exclusive. However, that is just his intepretation, and i agree 100% that evolution and the law of gravity says equally much about theism in general.
LEAVINGWT: Been there, done that! :-).
-
52
Good books against evolution?
by bohm inafter reading 'the greatest show on earth' by dawkins, i have been intrigued by how biblical literalists explain the many findings that seem to support evolution and contradict various parts of the bible.
in doing to i have browsed around on aig but i have generally felt let down by the quality of evidence and interpretations they present.
so i would like to ask all non-evolutionists: if i wanted to learn more about the physical case against evolution, what books should i read?
-
-
bohm
Thanks for the input! I very much hope this discussion will result in a short list of 'must-read' anti-evolution (pro-creation? dont know the most polite terms) books.
PS: Can you remember/recommend any of them? It is true that many blogs, etc. on evolution has a tendency to over-estimate the impact of a particular evidence and state something prove evolution when it does nothing of that kind. It is very damaging for the discussion.
Terry: That is true for some types of arguments, however i think eg. 'The greatest show on earth' present many very compelling facts, for example his examples on the results of breading of cabbage, dogs and foxes, that are fairly easy to understand and i would like to get another view on. It is my experience that facts, when the author understand them himself and WANT you to understand them, are often easily explained even to a lay-person.
-
52
Good books against evolution?
by bohm inafter reading 'the greatest show on earth' by dawkins, i have been intrigued by how biblical literalists explain the many findings that seem to support evolution and contradict various parts of the bible.
in doing to i have browsed around on aig but i have generally felt let down by the quality of evidence and interpretations they present.
so i would like to ask all non-evolutionists: if i wanted to learn more about the physical case against evolution, what books should i read?
-
-
bohm
Thanks Jonathan!
-
52
Good books against evolution?
by bohm inafter reading 'the greatest show on earth' by dawkins, i have been intrigued by how biblical literalists explain the many findings that seem to support evolution and contradict various parts of the bible.
in doing to i have browsed around on aig but i have generally felt let down by the quality of evidence and interpretations they present.
so i would like to ask all non-evolutionists: if i wanted to learn more about the physical case against evolution, what books should i read?
-
-
bohm
After reading 'The greatest show on earth' by Dawkins, i have been intrigued by how biblical literalists explain the many findings that seem to support evolution and contradict various parts of the bible. In doing to i have browsed around on AiG but i have generally felt let down by the quality of evidence and interpretations they present. So i would like to ask all non-evolutionists: If i wanted to learn more about the physical case against evolution, what books should i read?
-
2
Cuniform texts online
by bohm inhello.. one of the strongest arguments against the wts's 607 chronology is the large number of cuniform tablets dated in the periode 607-587bc which make the likelihood of an unknown king or extra regnal years very low.
however, i think it is most fair that i check this out myself and verify that the material is indeed as convincing as i has heard - ie.
the dates on the cuniform texts are relatively uncorrolated, that their number is not inflated, etc.
-
-
bohm
Well, i think i will mail a museum and post the results here.
-
2
Cuniform texts online
by bohm inhello.. one of the strongest arguments against the wts's 607 chronology is the large number of cuniform tablets dated in the periode 607-587bc which make the likelihood of an unknown king or extra regnal years very low.
however, i think it is most fair that i check this out myself and verify that the material is indeed as convincing as i has heard - ie.
the dates on the cuniform texts are relatively uncorrolated, that their number is not inflated, etc.
-
-
bohm
Good general site for babylonian periode: http://www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/chron00.html
It contain some texts, but not the vast material i hope to find
-
2
Cuniform texts online
by bohm inhello.. one of the strongest arguments against the wts's 607 chronology is the large number of cuniform tablets dated in the periode 607-587bc which make the likelihood of an unknown king or extra regnal years very low.
however, i think it is most fair that i check this out myself and verify that the material is indeed as convincing as i has heard - ie.
the dates on the cuniform texts are relatively uncorrolated, that their number is not inflated, etc.
-
-
bohm
Hello.
One of the strongest arguments against the WTS's 607 chronology is the large number of cuniform tablets dated in the periode 607-587bc which make the likelihood of an unknown king or extra regnal years very low. However, i think it is most fair that i check this out myself and verify that the material is indeed as convincing as i has heard - ie. the dates on the cuniform texts are relatively uncorrolated, that their number is not inflated, etc. So thats what im trying to figure out. I have found these sites by monkeying around for an hour:
http://cdli.ucla.edu/collections/bm/bm.html
But when i search the archive i do not find any date information at all - apparently it is not registered in the system, even though it is described in length how it would be registered!
So i would like to ask the scholars here who has checked out this line of evidence what they consider a good resource? Preferably, i would like the raw dataset as a text file i could parse myself and make sure the claims are statistically valid, but alternatively it would be neat with just an article describing how many text there are how many are dated to each babylonian king (or something like that).
Kind regards!
-
34
'Not defiled by women in fact they are virgins' ??
by Heartofaboy in.
can anyone enlighten me what these words at rev 14:4 means?.
this scripture was read at the memorial last night to prove the anointed come from the earth but the 'not defiled by women in fact they are virgins' part was glossed over..
-
-
bohm
I think this is an excelent topic for a 'question from the readers' to The Witchtower!