Re: Can you be objectivea about evolution?

James Hopper (hopper@k12.wcsu.ctstateu.edu)
Mon, 15 Apr 1996 15:01:48 -0400

>Hi James,
>
>On Sat, 13 Apr 1996, James Hopper wrote:
>
>> This sounds like a someone unwilling to debate the evidence and relying on
>> personal attack to carry his argument. Pretty weak approach. Surely, Denis
>> you don't think the evidence for evolution is as firm as that for
>> heliocentrism, do you? If you do, please explain why.
>
>I imagine you will probably think I'm attacking you for asking the
>following question: Are you a biologist? And do you study biology in an
>area that is significant to understanding evolution?

No, I am not a biologist. I am a mathematics teacher and thus I am trained
in logical argument, and and I can evaluate a reasoned defense of an
argument. However, the argument should be on the content of the discussion
and not rely on personal comments about one's opponent. However, I have
read a number of people who are biologists who disagree with your
assessment, (Walter Remine, Michael Denton and Robert Shapiro for example)
I also disagree with your feeling that only biologists are capable of
understanding and evaluating the evidence. I also wonder if it is even
possible to obtain an advanced degree in biology without agreeing with the
standard Darwinian paradigm. The facts of biology don't seem to be as much
in dispute as the interpretation of the facts. I would like to hear some of
your reasons for such a strong statement rather than a description of your
qualifications.( although I do think that your expertise should carry some
weight)

Regards,

Jim