Re: Why lie?

Susan Brassfield (Susan-Brassfield@ou.edu)
Wed, 24 Nov 1999 12:26:30 -0600

>Susan Brassfield wrote:
>
>>That's Gould saying "unnecessary." He's saying that strict gradualism is
>>not necessary to evolutionary theory. What Stephen said was that increase
>>in variation was controversial and then posted a portion of a discussion of
>>the rate of evolution (an entirely different discussion) as support for his
>>assertion, and quote had been altered to make it seem to support his
>>argument better.

Cliff:
>'Increase in variation' is a discussion "entirely different' from 'rate
>of evolution'?

yes. "Variations do not increase" as opposed to "evolution sometimes goes
fast and sometimes slow." They do not sound like identical converstaions to
me. Maybe I'm missing something.

>SJ's quotes seem to me different (and longer!) than those I've run into
>on the web. But whatever the source, I find their substance interesting,
>you don't.

and if they are dishonestly edited in order to sound interesting to a
creationist? What are you actually reading? You aren't reading anything
about evolution!

I've often thought I should make a collection of out-of-context creationist
quotes. Something that proves conclusively that Behe and Johnson are
atheists and rabid evolutionists. Now *there* would be some quotes that
were interesting!!!

Susan

----------

For if there is a sin against life, it consists not so much in despairing
of life as in hoping for another and in eluding the implacable grandeur of
this one.
--Albert Camus

http://www.telepath.com/susanb/