> Yes, the fact that he is a lawyer does colour my view.
Interesting. Does the fact that someone might be a medical doctor
color anyone's perception of their comments on geology? I noted that
someone out there (I forget who) apparently had the opinion that,
since I was a lowly engineer, my understanding of "science" was not
as good as theirs.
The fact that a person has been trained to examine arguments (and
many scientific discussions seem to wind up being arguments), to test
for veracity and logical form, and to critique supporting evidence,
is evidently insufficient for some people.
I note that there has not been a hesitancy expressed about
scientists and engineers discussing Hebrew and Greek word forms. If
a scientist can be assumed to be self-disciplined enough to
understand the appropriate context and intent of theology and ancient
languages, why is it considered impossible that a lawyer could be
self-disciplined enough to understand the appropriate context and
intent of science? Sounds like selective approval to me.
Incidentally, has anyone checked on the undergraduate education of PJ
(Phil Johnson?). I have taught engineers who, after completing their
engineering degrees went on to law school.
William M. Frix
Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering
Box 3021
John Brown University
Siloam Springs, AR 72761
Phone: (501) 524-7466
FAX: (501) 524-7499
EMAIL: wfrix@engr.jbu.edu