Re: Emily/auralies point

---

• To: g*@hort.net
• Subject: Re: [CHAT] Emily/auralies point
• From: Cathy Carpenter c*@insightbb.com
• Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 13:46:15 -0500
• In-reply-to: 029201c587d6$523010c0$6401a8c0@hal
• References: b9.5bba3f31.30067f50@aol.com 029201c587d6$523010c0$6401a8c0@hal

Indeed. And we have to remember that even scientists disagree about  
their science. Just take some time to read the violent disagreements  
within that community!

Cathy, west central IL, z5b

On Jul 13, 2005, at 1:11 PM, David Franzman wrote:

> Yep, I agree with you Auralie.  I have been having a similar  
> discussion with someone here.  That's why I didn't label the folks  
> who don't buy into the E. Theory.  It has nothing to do with  
> whether you believe in God or whether you accept Jesus Christ as  
> your savior.  I don't think that belief in a higher form is  
> mutually exclusive to believing in the forces of nature.  Yet there  
> are those who can not accept that if you have God then what he  
> created is exactly what we have today.  Not sure I understand the  
> inflexability.  I would think they would have more adherents if  
> they worked with the facts on the table a little more instead of  
> swimming against the current of modern science.
>
> David
> http://www.atouchofthetropics.net

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE GARDENCHAT

• References:
  • Re: Emily
    • From: A*
  • Re: Emily/auralies point
    • From: "D* F*"

• Prev by Date: Re: Emily
• Next by Date: Re: Chris's restaurant and Baby Plants
• Previous by thread: Re: Emily/auralies point
• Next by thread: Re: Emily