<snip>
>>True, but then we can discuss what makes evidence "good" and why
>>calling evidence "good" doesn't make it so and why the Creationist's
>>evidence isn't really good after all.
>
>And your argument would certainly be one of rationality rather than one
>of revelation.
....implying that revelation cannot be evoked through rational argument?
Dan
-------------------------------------------------------------
initial conditions = data (conception)
control of data = information (conception to puberty)
control of information = knowledge (puberty to marriage)
control of knowledge = wisdom (marriage to divorce)
-------------------------------------------------------------