schalldampfer

Hares don't chew cud. Leviticus 11:6 states that they do. The bible therefore has at least one error.

Jeremy Pallant

Seeing as Vanderzyden doesn't seem inclined to defend his holy book's errors here, I have created an opportunity for him to defend them <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=51&t=000697" target="_blank">here</a>.

Feel free to contribute further Biblical errors.

Edited to fix spelling, grammar and the URL. Clearly not my day today.

[ October 18, 2002: Message edited by: Jeremy Pallant ]</p>

RufusAtticus

Evolution also explains why we age and allows the medical community to work on treatments that affect aging. Compare that to the creationist non-explaination.

• Biology: Genes that increase fecundity at the cost of a shorter life will be prefered over competing genes.
  
  Creationism: God did it.

It is plainly obvious with one has a higher chance of leading to new medical technologies to alleaviate senescence.

Compare Genesis 1 to Genesis 2. They are separate and different accounts of Creation. They both can't be true accounts of The Creation. So at least one of them is in error, with respect to what actually happened.

RufusAtticus

Bump because Vander has some "issues" to deal with.