Re: How the Leopard...? (was Brian Goodwin on the web)

Bill Hamilton (whamilto@mich.com)
Mon, 8 Apr 1996 06:32:16 -0400

Steve Jones quoted Terry Gray:
>TG>Goodwin is part of that new evolutionary synthesis that I mentioned
>>in a previous post. So he makes critical comments about
>>neo-Darwinism while still being a full-fledged evolutionist. Your
>>use of Goodwin in support of PC is like YEC using Gould and Eldredge
>>and punctuated equilibrium in support of their view. Johnson plays
>>the same games. He uses internal debates among people who are
>>convinced of evolution to show that evolution is not true when
>>neither side believes that their comments lead to that conclusion.

While I mostly agree with Terry, it seems worth pointing out that the issue
is not what Gould and Eldredge, etc. believe. The quotations are intended
to show contradictions in evolution theory. Contradictions that perhaps
even Gould and Eldredge have not come to grips with. But to try to
illustrate internal contradictions in a field by quoting its practitioners
implies that the critic knows something the people being quoted don't, or
has performed a more thorough analysis than they have. And that's the part
that destroys the credibility of these kinds of attacks.

Steve continues
>
>Neither I, nor "Johnson" are playing "games". We have no doubt that
>all the evolutionists regard themselves as "full-fledged
>evolutionists". Indeed we do quote from such "full-fledged
>evolutionists" to point out the internal contradictions between
>"people who are convinced of evolution to show that evolution is not
>true". Indeed, what is the alternative? If you are claiming that
>non-evolutionists are not allowed to quote from evolutionists, then
>this is a neat way of protecting evolution from ever being criticised
>by non-evolutionists!

What is needed is Christians who become involved in the fields they are
criticizing. People who shout, "you're full of baloney" from the sidelines
are seldom taken seriously.

>On that basis *no* paradigm could ever be
>overthrown. What a wonderful defence that would be for Christian
>apologists: those who would point out alleged Biblical contradictions
>are not allowed to quote from the Bible because the writers were all
>convinced theists! :-)

Good example. How do you react to alleged Bible contradictions from
atheists, cynics, etc.? Usually it's obvious that the critic is either
unaware of, or discounting without justification something Christians are
well aware of. And for that reason the attack loses its credibility. As
I've pointed out to Phil before, evolutionists are reacting to his
criticisms in about the same way I would expect him to react if a scientist
decided to argue his own case in court.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
1346 W. Fairview Lane
Rochester, MI 48306
(810) 652 4148