>BH>Why do I make an issue of this? Well, Stephen, imagine yourself in
>the
>>midst of a challenge you probably have had to deal with at one time or
>>another: a disease that could become an epidemic. You have to make vaccine
>>available, if it's available, possibly quaranteen affected people, and
>>possibly trace the source of the disease. All of these activities are
>>based on knowledge of the cause and transmission of the particular disease
>>involved. Now suppose a group of people show up and challenge your
>>proposed actions. Further suppose these people have no experience in
>>public health or the life sciences, and have never made any contributins of
>>their own to either field. How wuld you react? About like the people in
>>the evolution research community I suspect, because that is how they see
>>creationist attacks.
Stephen responded
>
>This is a bit of a red-herring. :-) Creationists are generally not
>attacking science per se, certainly not practical applied science like
>medicine, but they are attacking the *metaphysical-naturalistic
>assumptions* behind much of what passes for evolutionary science.
You're missing my point. All I was trying to accomplish was to give you
some inkling of how scientists typically react to creationists. I have a
similar example with lawyers, which Phil admitted had merit. You are
dealing with human beings when you deal with scientists, and I hope you
want to lead some of them to Christ. If you intend to do that by building
friendships with them, some degree of empathy is required.
Bill Hamilton | Vehicle Systems Research
GM R&D Center | Warren, MI 48090-9055
810 986 1474 (voice) | 810 986 3003 (FAX)
hamilton@gmr.com (office) | whamilto@mich.com (home)