A Discussion Off Piste

[naomi24]

Would anyone care to look at this?

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/History/Myths-and-Legends/Question1209654-3.html

We currently have one poster banging his head on his desk (Sqad! Ibuprofen required!), one declaring he will never respond to the OP’s questions again, several suffering severe bouts of incredulity, and one or two having a chuckle at the suggestion that people who do not believe that the world is only 6000 years old are devoid of open minds. Fun ‘ere innit! ;o)

[mushroom25]

clearly the national trust have open minds then - when I visited the Giant's Causeway last year, one of the displays provided a "Young Earth - Intelligent Design" perspective on its creation.

[naomi24]

Mushroom, it seems the National Trust has changed its mind.


http://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2012/10/national-trust-amends-controversial-creationism-exhibit

[ladybirder]

Already been getting great enjoyment from that thread naomi. Carry on as you are please.

[mushroom25]

hmm. the caleb foundation.
beggars belief that NT would consult with such an overtly political fundamentalist group.

[naomi24]

Ladybirder, thanks. :o)

Mushroom, I can only imagine it was because they were seeking the creationist]view.

[ll_billym]

Always makes me laugh when they feel they have pull out what they think are 'extraordinary' examples to prove that there is 'Intelligent Design' - such as Giants Causeway or The Human Eye, as though those things require more 'effort' to exist. They don't seem to realise that from the scientific viewpoint there is just as much of exactly the same, 'magic' in a single hydrogen atom.

[wildwood]

redman41's reply is so succinct.