On Mar 30, 3:21=A0pm, Sean McHugh wrote:
> "s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" wrote:
> > On Mar 30, 11:13 am, Sean McHugh wrote:
> > > "s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" wrote:
>
> > > <snip>
>
> > > > I would be interested to know how many of those involved in
> > > > the promotion of the 'stolen generations' were evolutionists
> > > > who knew that some Aborigines had been deliberately killed so
> > > > that their skulls could be sent to British and European Museums
> > > > for studies to determine whether they were 'the missing
> > > > species' between apes and humans for scientific proof of
> > > > Darwin's 'Origin of Species' (Thank you, Jani, for pointing out my
e=
rror), =A0and as a diversionary tactic
> > > > against any fall-out that might come if the information (above)
> > > > came to be presented in the media.
>
> > > Twit!
>
> > Not as crazy as you have thought, Sean.
>
> You're also a pest. We were having a discussion about the indigenous
> matters, not evolution versus creationism
I chose articles about the Aborigines. Aren't they who are the
subjects of this topic?
Isn't your reaction due to the fact that you do not like any criticsm
of Evolution?
> <snip>
>
> This is what it is really all about:
>
> > Racism =A0Questions and Answers
> >http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3031
>
> > Scroll down to Darwin's bodysnatchers =A0/1067/
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Child stealers
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Stolen children has evolutionary tie
>
> Hey, no one said that you were the only twit. The people whom you cite
> are not only intellectually dishonest ratbags, they show they are
> quite prepared to slander when they think they can get away with it -
> like when the victims are no longer around to sue or defend
> themselves. You obviously share their character.
>
So all discussions should be limited to people who are alive today?
> <snip>
>
Sean. I know how you think on these matters.
However, I believe that Creationists should be heard on them.
Gladys Swager
|
