Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> > > Be that as it may, I am against the teaching of life's origins on the
> > > public dime, because it is a matter of public debate,
>
> > No it's not.
>
>   Just read a funny anecdote of what happens when things are considered
> "a matter of public debate":
>
> "In Brockport, N.Y, in 1887, M.C. Flanders argued the case of a flat
> Earth for three nights against two scientific gentlemen defending
> sphericity. Five townsmen chosen as judges voted unanimously for a
> flat Earth at the end."
>
>   You can really come up with "proofs" of any argument you want. For example
> in 1864 an author named William Carpenter published a book named "Theoretical
> Astronomy Examined and Exposed - Proving the Earth not a Globe", and later
> in 1885 another book named "A hundred proofs the Earth is not a Globe". He
> was being serious.
>
>   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth

fun anecdote, no doubt. :)

As far as I remember too, Mormoism started complete with witnesses and all
recognized legally.  First religion I think started with full legal backing...

That's the problem with layman thinking they can do better than centuries of
professionals dedicated to research.  They assume reality can be voted.

Post a reply to this message