RE: Today's blogs 2

Thanks for your kind support, Glenn.
 
In fact I respect ASA and its work.
 
That is why I said what I did.
 
ASA has made a big error in my view, in not grandfathering the ID
controversy but rather trying to defend "theistic evolution" over against ID
when the big sci orgs that have all the power and influence don't really
care much about the difference between the two - except when they can
misrepresent TE to try to disarm all ideas of design, meaning, or purpose in
nature. ("Joe Schmoe is a scientist who calls himself a Christian but
realizes that science and faith are completely separate." = science is truth
and faith is nonsense. That is why they are separate. If they were both
really true, they could not be separate because they would have to both
inhabit reality and there are not two realities.)
 
So the real controversy is, who gets to say what science is?
 
If there is evidence for God's work in nature, can that evidence be
admitted, or is the evidence itself actually anti-science?
 
Controversies like Kansas are simply a proxy for that question because it is
a question about who gets to say what science is.
 
cheers, Denyse
 

--
Read brief excerpts from my book, By Design or by Chance?: The Growing
Controversy On the Origins of Life in the Universe (Augsburg Fortress, 2004)
at
http://www.designorchance.com/press.html
Study Guide:
http://www.arn.org/arnproducts/books/b088sk.htm
Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0806651776/qid=1109790930/sr=8
-1/ref=pd_csp_1/104-8617533-8799957?v=glance
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0806651776/qid=1109790930/sr=
8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/104-8617533-8799957?v=glance&s=books&n=507846>
&s=books&n=507846
My blog:
http://post-darwinist.blogspot.com/
(go to other blogs from here)
Denyse O'Leary
Tel: 416 485-2392
Fax: 416 485-2392
oleary@sympatico.ca
www.designorchance.com
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of glennmorton@entouch.net
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 8:10 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Cc: glennmorton@entouch.net
Subject: RE: Today's blogs 2
>... ASA FAILED to grasp the opportunity to sponsor the ID controversy.
>SO the Discovery Institute got a foothold and now Discovery is setting the
agenda.
>ASA has become a forum for the people who are left behind.
>Frankly, I do not care whether you listen or not. Lots of organizations
just wither. But I did think I ought to warn you 
>that that is happening.
>If you see any future for yourselves, begin by involving more ID mavens in
your inner circles so you can adopt and 
>manage the controversy, instead of just being biffed around by it and
writing plaintive letters to whoever about how 
>you are misrepresented in journals.
>My guess is that ASA has about three years to do something smart like that,
and then it won't matter any more 
>whether it does or not.
>Cheers, Denyse
>P.S.: I speak frankly because, as a journalist, I don't qualify for
mem'ship in ASA and tend to blow clear of non-media-
>pro orgs anyway (to avoid potential conflict of interest). So I can't
benefit from association with you, but thought I 
>would help by warning you. If not, just forget it. - d.
Denyse is telling the truth. The ASA is impotent and is left behind(search
the archives where I said this or something like it several years ago).
They blew it on design. I would disagree with one thing. I personally think
it is already too late because the medicine (design) is far too distasteful
to the membership.
I have run groups responsible for tens of millions of dollars of
investments.  I know a thing or two about how the world works and how it
doesn't. One doesn't get anywhere in the world by "writing plaintive letters
to whoever about how you are misrepresented".  If you have to do that, you
have already lost the game.  RIP ASA