>Bertvan: Among ID supporters in this discussion group at the moment, you, DNAunion, Nelson, and I are not religious (as far as I know). Although Stephen is religious, he his reasons for skepticism of Darwinism are scientific. Surely a time will come when neo Darwinists will have to stop claiming all opposition to
"random variation and natural selection" equals religious fundamentalism.
>DNAunion: Two things. First, what I believe to be a correction to your final sentence.
"Surely a time will come when neo Darwinists will have to stop claiming all opposition to [the claimed unlimited creative powers of] "random variation and natural selection" equals religious fundamentalism."
I don't think any of the IDists you listed denies that RM & NS occurs and produces biological change, just that it has limitations that intelligence accounts for much better.
Second point - yes, I sure hope you are correct and "those people" stop labeling "use people" as religious fundies and Creationists.
For example, at 2 sites now, I have had to wastes weeks of posting and many hours of research (i.e., finding mainstream scientific materials that support my statements) at my first mention of the second law of thermodynamics or the word entropy. It doesn't matter to "those other people" that I am *NOT* stating that biological evolution defies the second law - as soon as I (a supposed Creationist) mention the concept, I am (supposedly) distorting it. Then I have to back up my position - *one that no other person would be required to back up* - and in fact is the mainstream meaning (it took me dozens of quotes at another site to show that I was not mangling entropy when I referred to it as "a measure of the randomness or disorder of a system", and the opponent - one of "those other people" - still claimed I didn't know what I was talking about. Why? Because I am supposedly one of "those people".)
See how powerful the tactic of labeling someone a Creationist is? It doesn't matter how valid the putative Creationist's statements are, once that label is affixed to them, everything they say is suspect (at the least, if not considered outright wrong).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 05 2000 - 13:41:15 EDT