xxx/ellauri170.html on line 964: Ok. So I am simplifying their argument, but I don’t care. I know this is the most you my dear readers can wrap your simian brains around. Their argument is silly in the first place. They found a shoulder blade from a 3-year-old “Lucy” or Australopithecus, and from this shoulder blade they determined that our human ancestors spent a lot of time in trees. Actually, this kind of logic is par for the course with these scientists. In fact, many of their other suppositions from Ramapethicus to Nebraska Man to Piltdown Man and Java Man have begun with either part of a skull, a jaw, or some teeth. It is amazing the creativity they possess when they can develop an entire ape-like man, complete with long wavy hair and hunch-backed appearance from a few teeth.
xxx/ellauri170.html on line 966: Perhaps we do not give these scientists enough credit for the faith they possess. Yes, to believe in this type of human evolution takes a whole lot of faith. Sadly, their faith is placed in the wrong location and in an untrue process. If only they were able to place that faith in the real designer behind the design. I believe it is imperative we educate ourselves and teach this generation as Paul warned Timothy to “keep that which is committed to your trust, avoiding oppositions of science falsely so called” (1 Timothy 6:20). So I'm simplifying the quote, but I don't care. Evolution is not science. It is a theory: “a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation” (dictionary.com).
xxx/ellauri170.html on line 972: Okay, again I am simplifying a little because science is never anything but theory, there is no element of faith involved. Aristotle was a scientist, Plato wasn´t. Gnosis ei ollut edes pseudotiedettä vaan salatietoa. Tiede on kreikaksi episteme.
3