Thanks for the comments, Jon. I knew I'd probably get in trouble with you by
using that Maori example. ;-) My point was to try and use an example that
didn't carry so much emotional baggage for those of us on the wrong side of
the globe!
By the way, I don't have my sources handy but I believe my info came from two
papers by NZ historian John Stenhouse. One was in the recent book edited by
Ron Numbers and Stenhouse "Disseminating Darwinism: The Role of Place, Race,
Religion, and Gender". [Reviewed recently in Books and Culture by Jim Moore;
see http://www.booksandculture.com ]. The other was a fairly recent (late
2000?) article by Stenhouse and Numbers in the British Journal for the
History of Science.
Karl
*********************
Karl V. Evans
cmekve@aol.com
In a message dated 4/1/01 1:40:17 AM Mountain Standard Time,
jdac@alphalink.com.au writes:
<< NZ and Oz are sufficently different not to be lumped together by the
northern
hemisphere antipodeans. It is as dangerous an error as calling a Canadian an
American, a Scot an Englishman, or a Netherlander Belgian :-)
I don't know many Maori personally but what I do know is that many Maori
churches
tend to lean towards the very fundamentalist and pentecostal or charismatic
end
of the spectrum. I suspect that YEC is taken as part of the package, along
with
suits, ties, and the KJV. It is possible that as a enthic group they feel
even
less ownership than usual in the scientific culture and are therefore even
more
likely to dispense with scientific discoveries.
Jon
>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 01 2001 - 20:04:18 EDT