 
|
 Return to the Guestbook |
| |
Guest |
Comments |
Date |
|
| |
Kyle
|
It’s interesting how the issue of what Eddy claimed (that the observations of the sun conform to a young universe) has been avoided thus far in the discussion. Its implications are very straight forward: that the evolution model, with all of its interpretations of the past (which are not observable nor repeatable) do not conform to the one point of CURRENT, OBSERVABLE evidence that the sun yields. In this, Eddy was able to divide between interpretation (suspecting the sun is 4.7 bill yrs) and observable data (that the solar neutrino count gives numbers concordant with a young chronology for the sun). And, in fact Matt, paleontology actually touts the NEED for interdisciplinary work,as well as an all-encompassing beginning philosophy/starting point (it needs to, since it fuels the cosmological primer for many old age facets, astronomy being one of them, as seen by Eddy’s previous quote). |
3/24/2003 3:02:06 AM |
|
|
|
|
