Re: Gaby, Abraham, Brownstein debate

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 4/3/2006 5:49:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ecmillerreid@... writes:

Do Abraham and Brownstein really believe the biblical accounts rather

than evolution? That has me worried about their scientific abilities.

Liz

DITTO!!!!

I thought the same thing.

[Guest guest]

Yeah...I thought what have I gotten myself into when I read that.

>

> Do Abraham and Brownstein really believe the biblical accounts rather

> than evolution? That has me worried about their scientific abilities.

>

> Liz

>

[Guest guest]

>>>>Do Abraham and Brownstein really believe the biblical accounts rather than evolution? That has me worried about their scientific abilities.Liz<<<

Can you expand on "biblical accounts" and "evolution"? What is this relating to? I know the background of both of them but I am not sure my answer is what you are looking for.

Buist

[Guest guest]

>>>>Do Abraham and Brownstein really believe the biblical accounts rather than evolution? That has me worried about their scientific abilities.Liz<<<

=================================================================================

Can you expand on "biblical accounts" and "evolution"? What is this relating to? I know the background of both of them but I am not sure my answer is what you are looking for.

===================================================================

Never mind. I didn't get a chance to read the update on the debate. I would say that for me it gave me great comfort to see that Dr. Abraham was a Christian (or Jewish) man. He prefaced the Iodine book with scripture along with his commentary on Dr. Brownstein's work. I believe that Dr. Brownstein is Jewish so that would describe his repeated references to the Torah and biblical history. His office is closed on Fridays (before the night of Shabbat) and his office is located in the heart of a Jewish community. Any treatment for me that is tied to biblical teaching makes me feel more secure. Because for me, as a Christian, my creator God is the one who has the answers and has created what I need to heal my body.

Stepping down off my soap box now. I know that there are different views but Biblical basis always wins out over "science" for me.

Buist

Buist

[Guest guest]

I don't have any problem with Abraham and Brownstein being religious -- but accepting the biblical account over evolution is not scientific -- and I had assumed that these two were scientists. Their evoking the Biblical story of the flood for the relative lack of iodine in the soil is so totally out there.  Even the Catholic church accepts evolution.I am a scientist btw -- so I suppose I am biased toward the scientific method and I would like to think that medical knowledge is gained through scientific inquiry and experimentation and not faith. LizOn Apr 3, 2006, at 4:38 PM, ladybugsandbees wrote:Never mind. I didn't get a chance to read the update on the debate.  I would say that for me it gave me great comfort to see that Dr. Abraham was a Christian (or Jewish) man.  He prefaced the Iodine book with scripture along with his commentary on Dr. Brownstein's work.  I believe that Dr. Brownstein is Jewish so that would describe his repeated references to the Torah and biblical history.  His office is closed on Fridays (before the night of Shabbat) and his office is located in the heart of a Jewish community.  Any treatment for me that is tied to biblical teaching makes me feel more secure.  Because for me, as a Christian, my creator God is the one who has the answers and has created what I need to heal my body. Stepping down off my soap box now.  I know that there are different views but Biblical basis always wins out over "science" for me.   Buist

[Guest guest]

>>>>Can someone elaborate? Now I'm getting worried, LOL. Where did you read thebit about lack of soil iodine coming from the flood? Maybe I read that but Ithought they were joking. For me it really undermines their credibility ifCreationism is the basis for some of their arguments.Also, I reread some of the Gaby rebuttals. He is very respected as aninnovator in alternative health, no?Elaine<<<<

They are referring to the Townsend Letters - last rebuttal for Oct 2005

Buist

[Guest guest]

This is the bit I reacted to in Abraham and Brownstein's first rebuttal:Gaby, assuming we evolve from a Big Bang 20 billion years ago, commented: "Since emerging from the iodine-rich oceans to become mammals, we have evolved in an iodine-poor environment."Actually, the oceans are very poor in iodine, based on concentration of this element. Although the largest reservoir of iodine is in the oceans, because of their large volume, the concentration of iodate/iodine/iodide in the oceans is only 0.05 PPM, very dilute indeed, compared to bromide at 70 PPM.17 For example, to obtain the RDA for iodine from seawater, you need 3 liters. Sea salt is very low in iodide, much lower than iodide in iodized table salt. It is understandable why someone who believes in the theory of evolution has a problem with such high requirements for iodine in an environment depleted of this element. Unless sometimes in the distant past, the topsoil of planet earth contains significant levels of iodine and meeting these high requirements for iodine sufficiency could then be achieved with any diet. The theory of evolution does not offer an intellectually satisfying answer to this paradox. However, the Biblical account of the origin of the world through creation 6000 years ago followed by the fall of man and the flood fits very well the current situation. According to the biblical narrative, the Creator declared planet earth and everything in it perfect. Therefore, the original planet earth contained a topsoil rich in iodine, and all elements required for perfect health of Adam, Eve and their descendants. A rebelled archangel was expelled from God's Habitation for attempting a hostile takeover (Isaiah 14:12-15). His name was Lucifer before the attempt (Isaiah 14:12) and Satan after his expulsion (Luke 10:18). Satan deceived Eve into believing that she could become a goddess by disobeying her Creator (Genesis 3:4,5). A sequence of events followed, culminating in the worldwide flood 4500 years ago. Following this episode, the receding waters washed away the topsoil with all its elements into oceans and seas. The new topsoil became deficient in iodine and most likely other essential elements, whose essentialities are still unknown. Mountainous areas became the most iodine-deficient because the receding waters were the most rapid over the steep slopes, eroding deeper into the soil. The Biblical account of the flood fits very well with the finding of high concentrations of iodine in brines, which accompany oil wells and natural gas deposits.8 By 1977, the brines associated with deposits of natural gas in Japan accounted for 56% of the world iodine production.16 The previous existence of iodine-rich living organisms from which came these iodine-rich degradation products strongly suggests that sometime in the distant past, iodine was plentiful on planet earth, and some catastrophic event resulted in washing away the iodine-rich top soil in the oceans.On Apr 3, 2006, at 5:39 PM, ladybugsandbees wrote:>>>>Can someone elaborate? Now I'm getting worried, LOL. Where did you read thebit about lack of soil iodine coming from the flood? Maybe I read that but Ithought they were joking. For me it really undermines their credibility ifCreationism is the basis for some of their arguments.Also, I reread some of the Gaby rebuttals. He is very respected as aninnovator in alternative health, no?Elaine<<<< They are referring to the Townsend Letters - last rebuttal for Oct 2005  Buist

[Guest guest]

> I don't have any problem with Abraham and Brownstein being religious

> -- but accepting the biblical account over evolution is not

> scientific -- and I had assumed that these two were scientists. Their

> evoking the Biblical story of the flood for the relative lack of

> iodine in the soil is so totally out there. Even the Catholic church

> accepts evolution.

>

Can someone elaborate? Now I'm getting worried, LOL. Where did you read the

bit about lack of soil iodine coming from the flood? Maybe I read that but I

thought they were joking. For me it really undermines their credibility if

Creationism is the basis for some of their arguments.

Also, I reread some of the Gaby rebuttals. He is very respected as an

innovator in alternative health, no?

Elaine

[Guest guest]

I don't know of any book. Zoe

You're right -- I missed this at first. Do you knowif Venturi has written a book tying this all together?

Liz

On Apr 4, 2006, at 6:13 AM, Zoe & wrote:

What amazes me in the whole evolution discussion of Gaby/Abraham is that they don't bring up Venturi. He is a major Italian researcher who has written beautifully -- and extensively -- on this whole issue.

[Guest guest]

>>Creationism doesn't necessarily rule out evolution. However, to fully

believe either you need a certain amount of faith. Logic is simply not

enough.

>>Logic does it for me. I'm a sucker for evidence every time. I'm a

'show me the beef' kind of woman.

>>Liz

I had to smile when i read this;-D As if induction was not a faith-based

operation...Crack me up.

Be careful not confuse evolution with creation. Nobody in their right mind

would believe the illogic of (big e)Evolution. Parts of it, sure. But as an

explanation for life?? You'd have to be mad.

Also, Bible-believing doctor has the advantage of being able to operate in

the world of logic, while atheistic scientists can only stare blankly at the

spiritual one. .

Besides, only the young of mind see faith and reason as mutually exclusive!

Very funny, indeed.

Keep thinking folks,

Jane