This needs a careful reply more than I can give time to.
I have often found that secularist scientists are very aggressive in their
response to creationism. In that they describe creationism as nonsense they
are quite right but they often spoil their argument by having a bigoted
attack on Christianity at the same time, e.g.. Dawkins, Dennett Steve Jones
etc.
I am afraid that too many clergy (I am one) as well as lawyers (Macbeth and
Johnson) and politicains (both Reagan, Quayle and our much-beloved Tony
Blair) have not got the knowledge or discrimination to challenge the
nonsense.
Despite having received stuff from ICR for over 25 years I have yet to see
anything of any competence coming from that stable.
I can understand the frustration of many scientists over creationism and
consider the over the top responses to be largely the fault of creationists,
who make it very difficult to have a reasoned discussion on Christianity and
Science. Creationsits do the cause of the Gospel incredible damage
Regards
Michael
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay Willingham" <jaywillingham@cfl.rr.com>
To: "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 6:53 AM
Subject: Renie's Rant
>
> The June 18, 2002, Scientific American article by editor in chief John =
> Rennie started out in a confrontational, condescending manner worthy of =
> the op/ed pages: "15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense-Opponents of =
> evolution want to make a place for creationism by tearing down real =
> science, but their arguments don't hold up"
>
> His opening goes on in a pretty supercilious tone when he says,=20
>
> "Embarrassingly, in the 21st century, in the most scientifically =
> advanced nation the world has ever known, creationists can still =
> persuade politicians, judges and ordinary citizens that evolution is a =
> flawed, poorly supported fantasy."
>
> So "politicians, judges and ordinary citizens" are still rubes devoid of =
> understanding of the true mysteries they can find only with the guidance =
> of scientists? =20
>
> No wonder some have called psychiatrists the "new clergy". =20
>
> Also calls to mind the technocrats who rule a Marxist landscape.=20
>
> No wonder it has set off a firestorm of commentary. This is good.
>
> SA and National Geographic's reported copyright infringement threats =
> against creationist published replies simply fuels the fires. Sells =
> magazines.
>
> Some of the counter-arguments of folks like Bill Hoesch at =
> http://www.icr.org/headlines/rennie.html are pretty good, at least as =
> good as some of Rennie's.
>
> Let the debate rage on!
>
> Jay
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 17 2002 - 09:31:15 EDT