RE: Islam and terrorism, Islam and science

From: Woodward Norm Civ WRALC/TIEDM (Norm.Woodward@robins.af.mil)
Date: Thu Nov 01 2001 - 16:10:19 EST

  • Next message: bivalve: "Haeckel, development, etc."

    -----Original Message-----
    From: bivalve [mailto:bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com]
    Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 3:54 PM
    To: asa@calvin.edu
    Subject: RE: Islam and terrorism, Islam and science

    >
    >Hmmm. Religious believers looking to modern science for a vindication of
    the credibility of their Sacred Book. Where have I seen that before?
    >
    >---Perhaps Haeckel's attempt to support Darwin's writings?

    Actually, it was Haeckel's attempts to support Haeckel's writings that
    caused problems. His ideas about development strictly recapitulating
    phylogeny are contrary to a modern evolutionary understanding.
    ---Yet, it was presented, per New York State syllabus, as a "proof" as late
    as 1962, and appears as such in Smithsonian Institute books on the subject
    at least 20 years after that...not to mention as a tool to dehumanize
    fetuses by the Choice advocates, even to this day.
     
    Nevertheless, there are many similarities among embryos or juveniles that
    are readily explained by evolution from a common ancestor but remain
    problematic for limited evolution advocates such as most intelligent design
    and young earth creationists.
    A common design by the Common Designer...where's the problem?

      Norm



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 01 2001 - 16:11:25 EST