Reflectorites
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:05:14 -0500, Susan Brassfield Cogan wrote:
First things first. On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 I wrote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[...]
BTW what does this mean:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 11:43:52 -0500, Susan *Brassfield Cogan* wrote:
Are congratulations in order?
[...]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I apologise if I missed a response.
SB>In case there's anyone left who hasn't heard this:
>
>http://www.wichitaeagle.com/news/elections/docs/boe0802web_txt.htm
>
>And of course I can't resist the opportunity to say to Stephen:
>
>TOLD YOU SO!!!
Told me so what? Did I ever say that I thought that the YECs would win? I
thought it was an outside chance, but unlikely given that YEC is a minority
position among the general public.
All along I have shared the ID movement's position that *more* (not less)
should be taught about evolution, namely its underlying philosophical
assumptions, and its many problems
So from that perspective, this is the best possible result for *ID*,
even if it is bad for YECs.
Now the new Board will have to implement the proposed standards *in
full*, and that will expose in full view to the public gaze, what
macroevolution really is, and will permit a full public debate on the
evidence for it, the controversies even among evolutionists about the
mechanism(s), and the materialistic-naturalistic assumptions underlying it.
And that will bring the ID movement to public attention even more! So
Johnson's prediction is coming true:
"The Darwinists themselves have changed that comfortable
situation by demanding that the public schools teach a great deal
more "about evolution." What they mean is that the public schools
should try much harder to persuade students to believe in
Darwinism, not that they should present fairly the evidence that is
causing Darwinists so much trouble. What goes on in the public
schools is the public's business, however, and even creationists are
entitled to point out errors and evasions in the textbooks and
teaching materials. Invocations of authority may work for a while,
but eventually determined protestors will persuade the public to
grant them a fair hearing on the evidence. As many more people
outside the Biblical fundamentalist camp learn how deeply
committed Darwinists are to opposing theism of any sort, and how
little support Darwinism finds in the scientific evidence, the
Darwinists may wish that they had never left their sanctuary."
(Johnson P.E., "Darwin on Trial," 1993, p.146)
Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In the early days of evolutionary paleontology it was assumed that the
major gaps would be filled in by further discoveries, and even, falsely, that
some discoveries had already filled them. As it became more and more
evident that the great gaps remained, despite wonderful progress in finding
the members of lesser transitional groups and progressive lines, it was no
longer satisfactory to impute this absence of objective data entirely to
chance. The failure of paleontology to produce such evidence was so
keenly felt that a few disillusioned naturalists even decided that the theory
of organic evolution, or of general organic continuity of descent, was
wrong, after all." (Simpson G.G., "Tempo and Mode in Evolution," [1944],
Columbia University Press: New York NY, 1949, Third Printing, p.115)
Stephen E. Jones | sejones@iinet.net.au | http://www.iinet.net.au/~sejones
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 03 2000 - 19:34:56 EDT