Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC830713); site erix.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!decvax!mcvax!enea!erix!robert
From: robert@erix.UUCP (Robert Virding)
Newsgroups: net.misc
Subject: Re: Creationism in the Classroom - (nf)
Message-ID: <322@erix.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Apr-84 09:39:26 EST
Article-I.D.: erix.322
Posted: Tue Apr  3 09:39:26 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Apr-84 01:25:31 EST
References: <6487@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Organization: L M Ericsson, Stockholm, Sweden
Lines: 21

Thank God (!) some one finally said something about trying to validate a
*scientific* theory by making it law. Doesn't the discussion on Pi=3 (or
whatever value) show how ludicruous this can become.

If creationists really feel that they must have a law to make people listen
then they must be VERY unsure of their results. History has shown that a
sound, well-based theory will gain acceptance even if their is opposition to
it because it is so *different*, or *strange*, or *against commonsense*.
Just look at the reception many modern theories in physics had.

Just a passing question I can't resist. What do creationists say about the
rest of the Universe? Does it exist and is it a big as other theories say?

Another question I can't resist. Why creation as in the bible? Why not say a
hindu creation, or a buddist creation? Or any other creation for that matter?
Many of them are much more interesting and satisfying than the rather simple
one in the bible. (Is it because of your beliefs? Very unscientific!)

			Robert Virding  @ L M Ericsson, Stockholm

UUCP: {decvax!philabs}!mcvax!enea!erix!robert