teddyv

If you could not care less then why did you bring him into the discussion?

I looked it up and something like 2-3% of all criminal cases actually make it to trial. Maybe 5-10% of civil cases end up in court.

Why do you get the luxury of making unsupported claims that you refuse to back up? If you can't be trusted to do this one simple thing, then why should I take your word on other things, like your formulation of a doctrine over one word in this thread? Sources should be checkable. Claiming you were taught this is not a source, nor defensible - it simply suggests indoctrination and a distinct lack of curiousity or a skeptical mind. And yes, claiming anyone, even Darwin, said something that they most likely did not is bearing false witness. Then blaming it on unknown teachers is a huge copout on the order of my dog ate my homework. Before you tell the rest of us to get over things, maybe some honest reflection on your rather poor behaviour.

BTW, you brought Darwin up and are misquoting him Sounds like bearing false witness at this point. The Bible has things to say about that.

I'm not confused. You made a claim that does not make sense. Appealing to your past teachers and profs is just a faulty appeal to authority and does not support your claim. Perhaps you have misremembered? It's not hard to address this. Google is your friend. I can't find any language as you posted. If you continue to make claims that you refuse to backup, why should I consider you credible? This is becoming a pattern.

Why are you posturing? You made the claim. Back it up.

You gonna back this one up? I linked On the Origin of the Species in an earlier post. Descent of Man is also freely available online. Those are the two most common works, but maybe there is something else in his writings?

Desalination plants are not cheap. Also, for landlocked countries in Africa and elsewhere, this would also mean extensive infrastructure to move water from the coasts inland. Then you have the needed infrastructure within a country to distribute it further. Add in geopolitical matters and it gets even harder.

Did you? Here it is - you can search it. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1228/1228-h/1228-h.htm Collateral damage. Sorry.

There is some history behind it of course. My FIL was the head of the main lobby organization supporting the independent schools for many years, so I got more of an inside view that area. Part of the history is that it was initially enacted to cover something like 33% of the operation costs when a Catholic school had to close and the subsequent influx of kids into the public system was going to cost a lot in capital expenditures. The government recognized that they actually save a lot of money with independent schools who are responsible for their own buildings and administration. To receive funding, schools must follow the provincial curriculum. This does not preclude incorporating religious elements in the curriculum, or teaching from a particular worldview. Kids will graduate with the appropriate diploma that is recognized by colleges and universities. Teachers need to be certified through the provincial teacher's registry. For the Distributed Learning people, there is a certain amount of grant money available to parents for use in purchasing books and other supplies, although these are generally managed and approved by the overseeing school.

I find it somewhat remarkable, that here in BC, generally considered far more socialist in character than any of the US States, we have an exceptional amount of education choice. The independent schools (Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Sikh, Muslim, etc.) all receive 50% of the standard public school per pupil operating grant. Capital costs are borne by the school communities themselves. Distributed Learning (DL) took off several years ago, and then blossomed during the pandemic. DL is essentially homeschooling with a certified teacher overseeing the parent's teaching and ensuring the learning outcomes are met based on the curriculum. DL was mainly offered through Christian schools, but is also available through public schools. Then the true home-schoolers are also out there.

??? Pretty sure I brought this up pages ago.

It is a mythical construct to explain what was before the created world arose from it. It is not to be considered an actual, tangible, or historical state of the world. From wiki, since it was easy to grab and captures the essence...

True. And they were observant and clever enough to understand the motions of the sun and moon well enough to predict eclipses.

Certainly that is a one possible interpretation. As an aside, a pastor once pointed out that, assuming the 6000 year old premise of the YEC's, Genesis 1-11 essentially covers 1/3 of the history recorded in the Bible.

Just to be clear, I don't see the ANE cosmology/chaos as an actual historical/material state of the universe or earth as this was a conceptualization of the world and universe by people limited in their technological ability to understand the material reality of the universe (and not because they were dumb, or anything like that). I can grant the the current model of the universe could be described as having a period of chaos and lack of form, but while somewhat compelling to compare to, it is likely coincidental to the ancient Israelites, and their contemporaries, cosmology.

If anything, it supports the cosmology of primordial chaos.

I may have underestimated somewhat on my recollection. Here is an article that discusses it. Several other sources have numbers around 17-20% by mid-1700's. But another I found claims higher. There might be more nuance to the data, and church attendance is not the ultimate metric of Christianity. Another interesting read on early Christians in the US but without any real numbers (early colonial period and on)

I'll have to do some looking online. A former pastor who is also a professor of Christian worldview relayed that. I recall looking it up once and verifying it myself and did find some historical research to support it.

Donald certainly had some prescience: "I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK?" Trump remarked at a campaign stop at Dordt College in Sioux Center, Iowa. "It's, like, incredible." You are certainly proving that up.

Strawman. Truth and historical fact do not have to be equivalent concepts. People can relay a truth through a fictional story.

Never seen anything really weird, except an aurora that behaved oddly, and I've spent a fair amount of time as a backyard astronomer.

The complaints about losing the Issue 1 vote in Ohio are so disingenuous. They knew exactly what they wanted to do with it if they won it.

That will be a complete and abject failure this side of the Second Coming. That you think this would work is contrary to all examples of human nature. The US never was Christian nation outside of a generally homogenous cultural version. Even at inception, less than 10% of the population were regular church attendees.

I'm a geologist, not a geophysicist, which we in the business sometimes refer to as "voodoo".