Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utastro.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!utastro!padraig
From: padraig@utastro.UUCP (Padraig Houlahan)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Orphaned Response
Message-ID: <490@utastro.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 4-Aug-85 13:26:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: utastro.490
Posted: Sun Aug  4 13:26:37 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 7-Aug-85 01:43:32 EDT
References: <388@iham1.UUCP> <14600032@hpfcrs.UUCP>
Organization: U. Texas, Astronomy, Austin, TX
Lines: 25

> >Obviously they're so confused among themselves that we can now state that
> >Creationists disagree about the state of the ''geologic column'', and
> >cite this as a reference.
> >
> >Keith Doyle
> >#  {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd
> >/* ---------- */
> Sure looks funny to me too!  Don't be to quick to jump on our case, however --
> unless you would like to see a huge list of contradictions made by the
> evolutionists!  Paul DuBois could produce one rather quickly, with references
> and all.
> 
> Lief Sorensen

That's ok, we have our own. It's at least 116 lines long.

Tell you what, why don't the creationists throw the list in our faces, and
see how we deal with the list? Now you get nothing for nothing,
so why don't you sweeten the deal for us (with all the trauma involved
in the mass desertion of the evolutionist ranks that will ensue, we should
get something in return - it's only fair), how about one scientific proof of
creationism?  You know, the kind that doesn't rely on attacking evolution,
divine revelation, or on sacred books.

Padraig Houlahan.