Re: Kansas and NBC

Blaine D. McArthur (bd_mac@pacbell.net)
Fri, 13 Aug 1999 07:16:17 -0700

--------------2E5676586F063CFCE87AA734
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Moorad,

Two points.

1. A lot of people, a lot of intelligent people, a lot of intelligent
Christians "do see it." I am only half kidding when I say this decision
scares me - I see Torquemada (?) just around the corner. This decision
serves only to stifle the search for the truth about God's creation.
This decision really bothers me, not as much for what they did, but for
why. The scandal of the evangelical has just grown deeper.

2. Is physics really on that much firmer a foundation than biology
is? There seems to me to be just as much controversy in cosmology and
astronomy as there is in biology. Yeah, they thow a lot more numbers
around than the biologists do; but they squabble and disagree about the
results just as much as the biologists do. I am sure that there is
someone on this list who, if they cared to, could play the devil's
advocate, and do the same kind of hatchet job on physics as P.J. did on
biology.

> . It is fine to emulate physics with the notion of "unification"
> but I do not see it in biology. Moorad
>
>

--------------2E5676586F063CFCE87AA734
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Moorad,

Two points.

1.    A lot of people, a lot of intelligent people, a lot of intelligent Christians "do see it."  I am only half kidding when I say this decision scares me - I see Torquemada (?) just around the corner.  This decision serves only to stifle the search for the truth about God's creation.  This decision really bothers me, not as much for what they did, but for why.  The scandal of the evangelical has just grown deeper.

2.    Is physics really on that much firmer a foundation than biology is?  There seems to me to be just as much controversy in cosmology and astronomy as there is in biology.  Yeah, they thow a lot more numbers around than the biologists do; but they squabble and disagree about the results just as much as the biologists do.  I am sure that there is someone on this list who, if they  cared to, could play the devil's advocate, and do the same kind of hatchet job on physics as P.J. did on biology.
 
 

.  It is fine to emulate physics with the notion of "unification"
but I do not see it in biology.   Moorad
 
 
   --------------2E5676586F063CFCE87AA734--