 |
 |
My wife is a public school teacher, and all I can say is, I hope they don't find the traces of goat blood left over from the teacher's union meeting. If they found out we were calling on Satan (who until this season was a forward for the Buffalo Sabres) to help us turn the younglings into terrorists, well, they still couldn't fire us. We're tenured! Get real! What my wife teaches in her multicultural class is mutual respect and tolerance. Only the true believers can't deal with that. Enjoy Fall! Rick McGirr Email: [log in to unmask] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paula Nixon" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 3:51 AM Subject: Re: Agnosticism = don't know > Dear Ray, > I certainly can understand why a person would be an agnostic. That > is they way people are taught if the schools can't completely turn > you into an atheist. There are a lot of agnostic scientists that > didn't believe in God, but can see there isn't any other option for > the way the everything is so perfectly made. It couldn't happen. > To paraphrase one scientist in the forward of Darwin's book, he > said that evolution didn't work, but the alternative that God > created the world is unexceptable so they are required to believe > the unbelievable. > You can start understanding God by appreciating the beauty he has > created for us. There is no need for beauty in evolution. The > Bible, although not written as a science book, believe it or not is > quite accurate scientifically and archaeologically the more they > dig. I heard a man talk that told of when he was working on his PhD > his professor said "I can prove the Bible isn't true. There were no > camels in Egypt in Abraham's time like the Bible says". Later he > said, "Moses couldn't have written the first 5 books of the Bible > because they didn't have writing then." The speaker then showed us > photos of his discoveries that proved that there were camels there > in Abraham's time, and that they did have writing in Mose's time. > The Bible explains God and you are plenty smart to understand him if > you try. Try it, you might like it. Paula > rayilynlee <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Paula, since I am an agnostic it means that we are not convinced God > exists, > but don't rule it out either. It means we don't know. No "agnostic" > scientist would believe in "Intelligent Design" which implies a > creator. > > I don't think we are smart enough to understand "God" if it exists. > I'm not. > Ray > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paula Nixon" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 12:32 AM > Subject: Re: The Scientific Method does not = God > > >> Dear Katie >> I doubt you have studied into it, why would you. They try to teach >> everyone in the schools that evolution is the only way and that it >> is a >> fact. However, there are some agnostic scientists out there that >> have >> come to the conclusion that there has to be Intelligent Design for >> everything to work as well as it does. They still aren't >> Christians. I >> have heard many scientists speak that finally decided that they >> just >> couldn't fall for evolution any more. They weren't Christians when >> they >> made that decision. >> >> Evolution tells you you have to believe in spontaneous generation >> that was >> disproved a hundred years ago, but they say if you give it long >> enough it >> will work, and "first there was nothing and then it exploded." >> Steven Jay >> Gould. That takes faith, which is a religion. You just don't have >> God >> telling you what to do. >> >> Paula >> >> >> lacewell wrote: >> Paula wrote: >> >> "I just want to let it be known that there is real science behind >> the >> study >> of Intelligent Design" >> >> Not! If you want to delude yourself, that's fine. ID is the >> religious >> right's attempt to cram Christian beliefs down our throats. No >> thanks. >> >> Katie >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: >> mailto:[log in to unmask] >> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: >> mailto:[log in to unmask] >> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn