tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post2443505179549019606..comments2024-03-28T08:30:20.260+01:00Comments on The Ugley Vicar: Lancet puts 'Origin of Species' above Bible, Qur'anAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03590979027426082714noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-7684722287646621422009-01-29T01:35:00.000+01:002009-01-29T01:35:00.000+01:00Hmmm... I wonder how the Euro-seculars understand ...Hmmm... I wonder how the Euro-seculars understand their declining birth rates (actually so low that they are not replacing those who die) in Darwinian terms?<BR/><BR/>Timothy Fountain<BR/>Accomplished Breeder<BR/>Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USATLF+https://www.blogger.com/profile/01650010433581488888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-48975468576579469422009-01-24T13:23:00.000+01:002009-01-24T13:23:00.000+01:00I thought the bible was 66 books. At least one IS ...I thought the bible was 66 books. <BR/><BR/>At least one IS fiction!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-53676314840636668252009-01-24T12:15:00.000+01:002009-01-24T12:15:00.000+01:00To David, the link is here, but I couldn't get it ...To David, the link is <A HREF="http://mag.digitalpc.co.uk/fvx/lancet/darwinsgifts/" REL="nofollow">here</A>, but I couldn't get it to work!<BR/><BR/>To Michael, true the quote doesn't <I>mention</I> the Bible. Nor does it specifically mention the Origin of Species. It just makes the latter "the most important work of non-fiction in history" - a claim which I hope you'll agree includes the Bible insofar as it is non-fiction!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03590979027426082714noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-30206199293845758272009-01-24T11:52:00.000+01:002009-01-24T11:52:00.000+01:00I havent read the Lancet on this. They may have bb...I havent read the Lancet on this. They may have bben OTT but your quote makes no mention of the Bible.<BR/><BR/>However Darwin was one of the greatest world scientists and of course there are no arguments against the basic fact of evolution , a vast age of the earth and universe, even though Darwin was wrong on details and didnt know about genetics, DNA plate tectonics etc. <BR/><BR/>This year will see some silly adulation of Darwin and some even sillier rubbishing of Darwin by creationists.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-52915954140693554552009-01-24T11:44:00.000+01:002009-01-24T11:44:00.000+01:00Please share the link to download the thing. Even ...Please share the link to download the thing. Even if they are talking about scientific publications which have changed how we view the world I would say that Copernicus is more significant.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05411510481652613673noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-59207190199308140612009-01-16T03:36:00.000+01:002009-01-16T03:36:00.000+01:00Does it come with some commemorative crockery from...Does it come with some commemorative crockery from Royal Doulton? This reads like some blurb from one of their Sunday Newspaper Pull-out ads. <BR/><BR/>Derek Smith<BR/>Singapore.Derekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02168865121804778136noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9031852996869768738.post-86071880190398902482009-01-15T23:58:00.000+01:002009-01-15T23:58:00.000+01:00I'm OK about the theory of evolution and all that ...I'm OK about the theory of evolution and all that but, er, pass the sickbag, Alice...Bishop Alan Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13879516755776951638noreply@blogger.com