Noahs Arc and Dinosaurs???

Dr. Hovind as any other religious believer in his own right an applying his own "brand" of science, is like any other preacher, he touches the harts of the believer with his references of God, at the same time he is influencing the way of thinking of the same people that he is touching.

Remember "many will come in my name" the bible even warn his kind.

I do my own research with the best available professional sources and more than one I prefer, also historical facts that are omitted in the bible are my specialty, I am a seeker of truth no a pursuer of lies.

I am not expert in any subject but I am very good at weighing the facts.

Faith is a powerful tool for the believer but when is misused by "experts" in the matter it can be used for manipulation.

You can find plenty of sites that will explain how dinosaurs were ancient men in the bible pets, and that they coexisted together in harmony until sin makes them men's enemy or the most used one, they die during the flood.

Taken in consideration the real facts about the existence of dinosaurs and men is impossible, taken the facts about floods in earth in the last 3 million years is rather impossible.

So what will you prefer to believe what somebody tells you to take in "faith" or the real facts and tangible truth.

If I can see it I believe it.

Originally posted by SupaSmoove101
I see a couple things wrong with Hovind. I see a couple things wrong with his theories. I see thousands of things wrong with Evolution.

I see a few things wrong with Creation stories. They are stories. Fiction. Fantasy. I pick the people that are not trying to make me believe with a "because we say". I go with the people that say this is what we found and what we think.

I pick the guy who is trying to improve people's lives rather than the mob who is using science to ruin peoples.

Science ruined so many lives? Then stop using it. Get off the internet. Stop driving. Don't wear seatbelts. Don't use your heat. Turn off the tv, the stereo, the cell phone.

Give me a break...religion USES the tools of science to try and blast their message to more people than the Discovery channel.

Why would you tell someone they came from nothing and thus thier life is only as meaningfull as they make it? That is extremely difficult for a child to handle.

On one hand, yes...death is hard for a child to handle yet children are much more resiliant than you give them credit for. On the other hand, why would you tell someone a great a mythical fantasy of a All Powerful Being that lets people get lost, sick, killed, and suffer for no apparent reason other than "it's his will" and "he works in mysterious ways?"

This same being permits young boys raped on a grand scale by people of the cloth. That is something great to believe in. "Hey son, God created us and protects us...now get to Sunday school and forgive Father Tim when he lays hands on you."

Oh, and as for the proof thing that you said was too much "work or time" to put here? Why is that you can ask for science facts from people here, but you close your bible and don't offer to lead others to the Kingdom of Heaven?


Seems kind of opposite of that which you are suppose to represent.

ok charlie you probably got me on this one, only because I dont know what animals diets were back then, but the bible says that all animals ate plants before the flood. believe it or not. thats what the bible says. now I dont know what it was like back then and neither do you, but I do suspect that since there were giants in the earth in those days and the IQ level in all creatures was probably way higher than it is today, im sure many things didnt have a problem surviving on its own. and you have to remember a few other things.

their were eight people on that boat. dont you think that they could have helped out any with animals that needed help?
eight people could do a lot on one big boat.

Kent Hovind has been disccussed many times, and I think the general understanding is that he is a fraud. He claims to be a doctor but is just spewing lies.

how is he a fraud and what is he lying about? name a few things that he teaches that is against science and is against truth... I would like to hear some, what was also not mentioned in the previous posts is another one if his goals. Dr Hovind is for truth and against error, so am I. I wouldnt want a science book teaching something that simply is not true. and that is one of Dr Hovinds main goals, to get the lies out of the textbooks.

get his video series from his site. and watch every single one:

Age of the earth
The garden of eden
Dinosaurs and the bible
lies in the textbooks
dangers of evolution
the hovind theory
and question and answer

he has even said in his videos, one that I have, that you can order his videos copy them and then send them back to get a refund. so you wouldnt be wasting money, I would call and verify about that refund before I do it though. but my point is, you cant just assume that Dr Hovind is a liar just because you dont like what he is teaching.

back in Jesus day, they pharisees didnt like what Jesus taught and they believed it not to be true just because [they] didnt want to believe, therefore [to them] it wasnt true.

that doesnt make sense, but you find the same logic today between the two arguments, most people dont believe creation to be true just because they dont want to, and that is not how you determine truth.

along witih this belief of noahs flood, I also believe that man used to be way smarter than man is today. the IQ level was probably way higher. increased oxygen and atmopheric pressure can do that to people.

the bible teaches that there was a canopy of water above the atmosphere which could and probably did provide hyperbarric conditions.

but like I say in almost every post. I still take the bible by faith.

thanks

Originally posted by Evolution Cruncher
ok charlie you probably got me on this one, only because I dont know what animals diets were back then, but the bible says that all animals ate plants before the flood. believe it or not. thats what the bible says.

Ok, was this flood the whole world or just one region of the world? Surely a massive flood covering the entire planet left SOME form of proof. Was only a few thousand years ago, right? Did they have all the various forms of frogs, bugs, birds and more on the Ark two-by-two or did those that didn't make it to the Ark just get created after the flood?

now I dont know what it was like back then and neither do you, but I do suspect that since there were giants in the earth in those days and the IQ level in all creatures was probably way higher than it is today, im sure many things didnt have a problem surviving on its own. and you have to remember a few other things.

You don't know what it was like, yet you go on to speculate about IQ and survival skills? Even today, I assure you...many creatures have no problem surviving on their own.

their were eight people on that boat. dont you think that they could have helped out any with animals that needed help?
eight people could do a lot on one big boat.

Currently, scientists have named and successfully classified over 1.5 million species. It is estimated that there are as little as 2 million to as many as 50 million more species that have not yet been found and/or have been incorrectly classified. Did those 8 people take care of all those?


That is some serious work.

I wouldnt want a science book teaching something that simply is not true.

Oh the bomb...


How do you know the bible or creation is "true" and not simply a story? You take a hard line with evolution but then put the blinders on and just "believe?"

...you cant just assume that Dr Hovind is a liar just because you dont like what he is teaching.

And you can't believe what he says is right or true either just because he is teaching it.

back in Jesus day, they pharisees didnt like what Jesus taught and they believed it not to be true just because [they] didnt want to believe, therefore [to them] it wasnt true.

Didn't you just say above that you were not around back then? I guess maybe you were...

that doesnt make sense, but you find the same logic today between the two arguments, most people dont believe creation to be true just because they dont want to, and that is not how you determine truth.


but like I say in almost every post. I still take the bible by faith.

People don't believe because they don't want to, yet you follow one way because you just "believe." Do you see the contradiction there?

Anyway, I will assure you that understand everything in science books is not all true. All dinos were grey, slow, and dumb when I was in school. far different than today's ideas. We don't know it all, but we strive to find out by inquiring if things are true and not just taking things on "faith."

Many can't help but go off topic and end up at the basic 'Evolution verses Creation' argument. I think what divides us is 'Purpose and Chance.' Many feel we're just here by Chance and there's no Purpose to life- Live and Die. Then the others can't accept 'Chance', that there has to be a Purpose to life- There must be more than this. They say, "I don't want to die."

Live life to the full and then die. Some however don't have it so good and would rather die than suffer in life. I highly think that extremely poor and uneducated people accept a creator over the chance theory. The inteligent, rich, educated and powerful never looked out for the lowly ones-Survival of the Fittest. Which brings me to the 'human only' qualities: Love, compassion, forgiveness, self-sacrifice, self-control and many others. When we act out the 'Survival of the Fittest' behavior, we become as the animals. The animals however are better than us because they are perfectly in tune with the environment. They don't go messing around with the eco system as we have done to destroy the planet. They don't torture each other in a sick and twisted way. They kill to eat just to survive, we do it for fun and pleasure. We humans have a gift of superior inteligence and the planet and the animals are being ruined by our arogance.
At the rate the world's going, we won't have a home in another 500 years or less. Personally I feel there's more hope to believe in the promises in the Bible than to trust the human families in charge of this planet.

To my understanding God has been allowing various human governments to try to rule the masses so to prove that human rulers always dominate man to his injury. Every nation could never make the rich and the poor happy at the same time.

Adam and Eve chose to be independent from God when they ate from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Bad. To prove man could not govern themselves he allowed Adam and Eve to have offspring after their erring ways. God would love to help everyone out with their ailments, suffering, injustices and many more right now, but his quality of Justice states that an issue must be settled first.

Originally posted by SupaSmoove101
Koala's [..] They came from a common ancestor ~bear~ that was on the Ark.

You have just make a case for macro-evolution.

There was a population of bears, over time, they evolved from omnivorous placentals into eucalyptus only eating marsupials.

If a koala can evolve from a bear, than a man can evolve from a monkey.

You have also demonstrated why 'kind' is completely meaningless and in fact non-existant. It doesn't make sense to say that koalas and bears are a 'kind', and that that 'kind' excludes dogs, which are much more similar to bears than koalas, or cats, which are far more similar to bears than koalas.

Originally posted by Charlie Murphy
You sound familiar, and since you registered recently I have to think maybe you are Expert999?

Members should not speculate on which member is what former banned member. Lets keep it on the topic at hand, Noah's ark.

Originally posted by SupaSmoove101
I think Evolutionists better get up to speed with God because he is going to judge them some day and it will not be a fancy little tea party.

So lets get it straight, when posed with questions about science, you respond with damnation and hellfire?

When Darwin met god, I'm sure they had a nice little discussion.
"Chuck! Good to see you mi amigo' (obviously this is jesus talking, hence the spanish)
"Hola Jesus! I must admit I am surprised to see you, where's my daughter?"
"Over there, playing with Newton and Ghandi. Anyway, I thought it was dang clever how you figured out how animals changed. And that whole wasp-catepillar arguement was great, of course we wouldnt' design anything like that, thats just sick!"
"Thanks. Nice beard."
" You too Amigo!. Sorry about the baldness tho, but its all part of the plan!"

and so on.

You sound familiar, and since you registered recently I have to think maybe you are Expert999?

actually I know who expert999 is, hes a cool guy just hard to talk to sometimes. hes the one who got me into this site. I guess the reason we both sound alike is because we both believe in the same thing and both watch the same video series by Dr Hovind. thats probably what you sense in both of us (is Dr Hovinds teachings)
I admit I do watch Dr Hovinds series, I know that expert does or did, I showed them to him. but as for being expert? Ive only sent him a few emails, I dont even know his name...

I hope that better explains who I am without confusing two people to being eachother.

thanks

Originally posted by Evolution Cruncher

You sound familiar, and since you registered recently I have to think maybe you are Expert999?

actually I know who expert999 is, hes a cool guy

Thats exactly what his other alter ego said! What a coincidence.

I wonder what the chances are that you both have the same IP address.

Originally posted by SupaSmoove101
Why are there still ape's if we are their advanced form? I thought evolution was survival of the fittest.

I thought you were supposed to have studied evolution and found it lacking? The above question is a very basic question. There's nothing wrong with it, but the only way that anyone honestly ask it is if they aren't too familiar with evolution.

The term survival of the fittest, in fact, wasn't coined by Darwin, and doesn't appear in the first editions of Origins.

As far as why are there still apes today, why are there bears if they evolved into koalas like you said?

When a population evolves, that doesn't mean that every member os the speices evolves, and that doesn't mean that all closely related species evolve either. We have apes today because a population of them, not all of them, got put under the selective pressures that ulitmately lead to man.

Trust me all you have is faith in Evolution, there is no way that it will ever be undeniably prooven.

No one has 'faith' in evolution, its a scientific theory, faith has nothing to do with it. And like all scientific theories, evolution (the theory that populations change via a mechanism of natural selection that leads to adaptation over generational time) will never be 'proven'. Theories do not 'graduate' into facts. They are made, and attempts at refutation are flung at it. Darwin's theory has survived intense scrutiny and tough tests for nearly 200 years.

So why would people even try to tell me that I am argueing for religion and you are argueing for Science?

Because thats precisely what the situation is. You have faith in creationism, and therefore, no matter what possible evidence is put forward, you will insist that creationism is how it happens, no matter how irrational it ends up being. Evolutionists merely agree that evolutionary theory is well tested, well supported, and for the time being nicely acceptable and has good explanatory power, just like they do with any other scientific theory. There used to be a lot of people that had faith that the earth was at the center of the universe and that the sun rotated around it being held up by crystal spheres, because of their religious beleifs this interpretation was important to them. Even after galilleo presented evidence to the contrary they stuck with that irrational faith based interpretation. Even Newton and his mechanical heavens operating by the blind, thoughtless ungodly agency of Gravity, where orbits were even predictable, was met with irrational faith based resistance. God moved the heavens, not gravity, according to these people. And similarly today we have people who cannot deal with evolution because they think that it means that there is no god and that it contradicts the bible. Just like the anti-newtonians of the past, eventually they will adapt and accept evolution just as much as modern anti-darwinians accept gravity as so powerful a theory that they call it a 'fact'.

lease watch the Creation vs. Evolution videos by Kent Hovind and they will explain away all of your Neanderthals and other half human bones that people find

There is absolutely nothing in those videos that refutes evolutionary biology and the like. What in the world did you find to be at all convincing of kent hovind's 'arguments'??

I could try to explain for you but it is much to long a subject and in more depth than I wish to go at this forum.

other peoples taurus
or is the Ark something entirely different?

Lots of people have interpreted the noah's ark story as an backwards projecting 'echo' of the jesus passion, much like how jesus is said to be the last adam. Noah was in the ark, the tomb, in the dark, because of the will of god, and then miraculously like the time in sheol/the grave/the ark ends, noah opens the giant doors of the ark and emerges back into the world, like the stone is removed from the tomb and jesus is resurrected.
This makes no sense if the noahs ark story is just literal dirty little historical reporting.

evolution cruncher
how does science know[that organisms change over time

Because we can observe that organisms change over time, in the lab and in the wild. We can also see that all the evidence in the fossil record and in the investigations into the genetics of populations of animals and the oberserved instances of actual speciation is completely supportive and congruent with these big changes have occured thru a mechanism of natural selection acting upon variation supplied by mutations and resulting in adaptation as a result of increasing fitness. What evidence do you, or anyone else, have that the theory can't work?

he textbooks will say

High school textbooks aren't a great source for science. I'll agree. They present science like they present history and everything else, in very basic black and white terms. So they don't get into the problems with a lot of the abiogenetic theories that are out there, hell they don't get into them in any detail.

Luci along with the other varieties you mentioned dont have enough bones to determine what it is.

Yes it does.

Luci is not a missing link.

Yes she is. She and other specimins of her species are intermediate between something like chimps and man. Thats the very definition of a missing link.

but the bible says that all animals ate plants before the flood. believe it or not. thats what the bible says.

I think that you are thinking of before the fall, not before the flood. Maybe I am wrong that, what chapter and verse?

actually I know who expert999 is, hes a cool guy just hard to talk to sometimes.

I'm sorry to say that he is not a cool guy, despite what you may have seen. He came to this site for his own reasons and once here merely mindlessly and stupidly regurgitated the stuff that he had been told by people like Kent Hovind and apparently hadn't even bothered to reserarch for himself (he was pretty clueless about it all). He refused to participate in any sort of discussion about the stuff either, he just constantly changed subjects and threw up another 'ploy' when the first one was put under scrutiny by members here. Basically he just kept starting discussions and running away. Eventually he got banned for being unethical and then the little coward tried to come back, doing it all agian, put under a fake name. He wouldnt' even respond to messages trying to work it out with him.

So no, not a cool guy. You, on the other hand, are at least intersted in discussing the stuff. He, apparently, was afraid to.

some of the other so-called missing links have proven to be a hoax.

Piltdown Man was a hoax, one that was revealed by scientific testing. "Nebraska Man" was an error, not a hoax, and no one took it too seriously anyway, every could clearly see that it was extrapolating too much from too little of a specimin. The big point here is, regardless of that, there are specimins that are not hoaxes or errors, that have stood up to instense scrutinity.
And may I add that the really intesnse scrutiny has not come from the creationist community, but rather the scientific community. Creationist researchers tend to just dismiss anything that is a problem for them.

I looked up his[klent hovind's] work and he is right.

No. Kent Hovind is not right. He is, in fact, wildly and absurdly wrong. What did you find convincing of his 'arguments'?

A complete moron can graduate from a sanctioned University, probably even a rapist could have a PhD

Or kent hovind could be a rapist. Or a person can be on the staff at Answers in genesis and be a pedophile. Hell hovind was charged with battery and assault no of a women who was renting trailer space from him no? I notice that you are managing to still avoid any specifics and instead only insist that the criminal Hovind is correct (without bothering to explain how).

A PhD from a sanctioned school does not make you an all knowing incredible person. Stop using that arguement.

Lets be brutally honest here and recognize that having a Phd is seen as a high mark and seen as a sign of respectability, because PhDs tend to be rather accomplished people, and that is why hovind went to an uncertified diploma mill to get a fake degree that says he's a doctor, and thats why he goes around calling himself 'Dr' Hovind, to soak up the respectability and authority that actual Dr's have.

I pick the guy who is trying to improve people's lives rather than the mob who is using science to ruin peoples

Are you kdding? The researchers using evolutionary algorithms to figure out how to deal with the problems of the evoltuion of drug resistant-diseases and the evolution of viruses and harmful bacteria are 'bad guys', but a crook and liar like hovind who makes money off bogus video-tapes and illegally deposited over a million dollars in multiple bank accounts over the course of a single year is the 'good guy'? He's a tax cheat who is trying to claim that he is a ministry and therefore not only doesn't have to pay taxes but doesn't even have to file as a ministry. If he wanted to help people he wouldn't just be banking the money that the IRS investigation shows that he's been steadily collecting from his website, radio-show, chick tracts, video lectures, and public lectures.

I mean, get real, hovind is not a good guy. I won't pretend that all evolutionists are good guys, but evolution has done a hell of a lot more for the world than a charlatan like hovind.

Why would you tell someone they came from nothing and thus thier life is only as meaningfull as they make it? That is extremely difficult for a child to handle.

Don't pretend that evolutionary science, which isn't even explained to small children because its a complex science, is more damaging than teaching them that they're sinners who are going to get to hell and enternal damnation if they don't worship jesus who was nearly flayed alive, had thorns shoved into his head, was pinned to a cross with iron nails, and finally died after hanging there for three days and then got stabbed with a giant spear. Its ludicrous to pretend that understanding a simple science is going to result in messing them up but that that is just hunky dory.

marg
What it surprise me the most is that Dr. Hovind even has his own version and iterpretations of Genesis accounts.

Marg, kent hovind does not have a doctorate. Please do not call him Dr. Hovind, he's not a Dr. He went to a 'school' that is little more than a diploma mill called 'Patriot University'. Its not regionally accredited, like real schools are. Its accredited by a private group, its like SimonGray issuing doctorates to people here and saying he'saccredited by ATS.

Evolution Crusher- Maybe it is Hovind that is familiar, You used a lot of the same phrases likie "a pink one and a blue one" on the issue of kinds. You also have the same writing style.

Nygdan-

Originally posted by Nygdan
Members should not speculate on which member is what former banned member. Lets keep it on the topic at hand, Noah's ark.

My question was just so that this thread doesn't become a mess like many I have seen Expert999 enter. I enjoy discussing this topic and want it to stay on track.

As for Kent Hovind Here is Nygdan's own thread about his tax fraud:
Source
And he always contradicts himself:
Source

I wonder what the chances are that you both have the same IP address.

well I do know that he lives in the same town as I. you are might be seeing the same proxy address we share, since we probably share the same ISP. there are only two ISPs around here.

think what you want, but until you know for sure, dont accuse me of being someone else.

by nydgan]
Marg, kent hovind does not have a doctorate. Please do not call him Dr. Hovind, he's not a Dr. He went to a 'school' that is little more than a diploma mill called 'Patriot University'. Its not regionally accredited, like real schools are. Its accredited by a private group, its like SimonGray issuing doctorates to people here and saying he'saccredited by ATS.

He, he, i actually got his biography so I read all about his line of studies, but he call himself a doctor and he is also a self proclaim creationist expert.

In order for him to get attention he can not go against all sciences because that will take away his credibility.

Hum, I guess that is the reason I said previously that I trust professional, I made add, "with good credentials".

[edit on 27-7-2005 by marg6043]

Originally posted by Evolution Cruncher
well I do know that he lives in the same town as I. you are might be seeing the same proxy address we share, since we probably share the same ISP. there are only two ISPs around here.

Actually I couldn't see your IP. It was just a really lucky guess. ESP for IP.. I'm just amazing.

think what you want, but until you know for sure, dont accuse me of being someone else.

I didn't accuse you of being him, I supected it aloud. Apologies for the mistaken identity.. until I know for sure of course.

Enjoy the discussions.

[Edited before I get my a$$ kicked by mods- I didn't notice the 'do not speculate request]

Hmm.. so.. koalas must have swam several thousands kms without dieing of old age first. Has to be the only explanation [that and the carried gum trees in the pouches].. as that has not been edequately adressed.. neither has the fact that aboriginals survived this 'great flood'.. they've been in Aus for a minumum of 40 thousand years.

[edit on 27-7-2005 by riley]

ok riley, think whatever you want, I have people as my friends on myspace and I dont even know their names but I know thay they live in this town. it doesnt mean that I am all over myspace, it means that I simply dont know their names. and yes we both share the same interest in Kent Hovind (ill try not to use DR since you guys dont think he earned that title fairly) that is why I use the terms, "pink one and a blue one" its because Kent Hovind uses the smae terms. I use everything Kent uses. but I first research his sources before going out and claiming them to be true.

anyways, back to the subject. bottom line. all I am here for is discussion and explaining my beliefs and discussing science with many of you intelligent people. also to learn things by discussion. yea I share the same goals as Kent Hovind and I believe in the same book and same creation theory, but that does not mean that I am automatically wrong, nor does it make me the expert999 jsut because we may have the same style of writing or same sources of live in the same town without even knowing eachothers names. now I dont know if he knows my name, but I dont know his, I dont really care to know, all I know is that Expert999 is not the easiest person to talk to on this topic for the same reason most people dont like talking about this topic, it rubs them the wrong way, sometimes.

anyways, I dont want to cause any trouble, I just want to discuss,

if you get Kent Hovinds 7th video in the series called questions and answers, he explains how he got his PHD and where.
I think more people need to watch his series before they go telling everyone else that he is a liar. do some research on him youself. you will find that he has many good points. I did. and I wasnt even a christian when I watched his videos.

Riley,

When someone is banned, we DO check IPs at the door for things such as this.

There is no need to continue to harass another member (which is breaking the T&C's of this site) over the thought he is someone else. Let's just keep it on topic at hand. Let me just put it to rest that EC and Expert999 are indeed different members.

Thanks and back to it.

1: their is evidence of a global flood, there are tree stumps in deserts that are thousands of years old and are though to have been carried by water for miles away.
2: they think they found noahs ark in a mountian range somewere in the middle east
3: if it was a global flood that wiped out the dinos then it would have made the strata mix up (dinosaure bones sink to bottom, and human float to top) and thats why they think that they existed so many years before
4: they resently found a dino with a small mamal (cat like or something) in its stomach, but mamals wernt supposed to exist for thousands of years after the dinos too so if mamles wernt supposed to exist then and we have evidense of it now then y is it so hard to believe that humans did too?
5: their are footprint fossils with a dino fotprint and a human footprint inside, although i think a while ago it was found to be froud but im not sure
6: i would get some other evidense/explinations but im in a hury

1. HUmans could have brought the tree stumps there or environments have changed so at one time that might not have been a desert.

2. Yes the think they did. They might not have. But saying they did the mountain was Mt Erarat which i believe is roughly 17,000 ft tall, i could be off. Which is about 3 miles deep, so we're talking an ocean being rained down in just 40 days and the disapearing with no trace, not vey likely

3. ??? why would dinosaur bones sink, they should be made out of the same stuff as out bones so they wouldnt sink anymore than ours.

4. Mammals did exist at the time of the dinosaurs.

5. id go with the hoax, because even if dinosaurs were killed off only a few thousand years ago i would doubt their footprints would still eb around.

6. Evidence against Flood: since rain is fresh water all saltwater species might die from being in to fresh water, or if the water was salty there would be no fresh water animals. To totally cover the earth with water there would be so much water that you would quite litteraly drown from breathing and im not just exagerating or making that up. For Noah to load all the animals in the amound of time suggested in the bible he would have had to load some 100 animals a second. Anotehr big problem there is not enough water on earth to completly cover the earth(obviously or it would have). And if somthing hit Earth bringing water here( Comet) it would have ot be so large we'd have bigger things than a flood to worry about. NOt to mention that it took thousands of years of tropical scale rainfall to fill the oceans, now imagine filling up the rest of earth, it'd take alot more than 40 days.

Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
Riley,

When someone is banned, we DO check IPs at the door for things such as this.

There is no need to continue to harass another member (which is breaking the T&C's of this site) over the thought he is someone else. Let's just keep it on topic at hand. Let me just put it to rest that EC and Expert999 are indeed different members.

Thanks and back to it.

I was actually editing while you were apparently posting.. and apologised.
Sorry for the drama.

oh dear.
Cruncher.. I should have edited earlier [uh. okay- well maybe shouldn't have said it in the first place..] there is no need to give me further explanations.. I think it's nice you live in the same town. Perhaps you could go to the creationalist zoo together or something.. it's healthy to be around people who understand your views.. and to have them challenged.