Re: RATE Vol. II

Some further comments on a possible ASA statement against young earth
claims:

1) The distinction that some have made between an organizational position &
a membership requirement is important. I don't think we should limit
membership to those who accept an old earth. There is precedent for this -
I'm know that there are members of the American Physical Society who don't
accept the organization's official statement on the teaching of evolution.

2) I think Dick's statement is a good start. But we need to think
carefully about how such a position statement should be phrased, & not rush
into it.

3) One question is whether we should refer just to an old _earth_ or an old
_universe_. OTOH one of the cleanest results of radioactive dating
(U235/U238 ratio) actually has to do with the age of the material from which
the solar system formed, > 6.5 Gyr, rather than the age of the earth itself.
OTOH while we now have a fairly certain estimate of the time, ~14 GYr, since
beginning of cosmic expansion, talking about "the age of the universe" is a
little tricky for several reasons.

4) There is little point in making such a statement unless the organization
is willing to promote it strongly among conservative Christians.

5) To be fair, there's a possibility that such a statement could have a
backlash from non-Christians in the media: "See how enlightened these
Christian scientists are - they've just caught on to something that everyone
else has known for a couple of centuries!"

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
Received on Sun May 21 21:03:11 2006