No " - an Astronomy Net God & Science Forum message"> No "">
Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
That Should Have Read "practically No "

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by M.W.Pearson on October 18, 2003 01:53:03 UTC

I had not meant to represent myself as a final
authority on all questions without further discussion. I had made some observations which
are pretty accepted in scholarly circles. Certainly there is wiggle room and possibility for debate.
But, Aaron, just out of high school, how can you
simply dictate an interpretation of history
that is not consistent in terms of definitions
and contains practically no carefully assembled examples and logic?

I suspect what you said is merely the rhetoric
of bluster, not a well-reasoned thought based on a deep reading of the matter.

Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    Google
     
    Web www.astronomy.net
    DayNightLine
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
    Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
    "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
    are trademarks of John Huggins