Re: RATE Vol. II

 Having just spent a week at the USGS/Stanford SHRIMP [Sensitive High Resolution Ion MicroProbe] lab dating zircons, this whole discussion has a rather quaint ring to it. There is NO scientific controversy over the age of the earth and ASA should be willing to say so (as noted by others, this has nothing to do with membership requirements). Special issues of PSCF or detailed analyses of RATE probably would have a detrimental effect in that it would give RATE a forum in which it would appear that they are a legitimate contender. Look at ID; they've been doing this for years. Despite the fact that numerous scientific and theological groups have addressed ID and shown it's massive shortcomings, the only thing the public hears is that legitimate groups seem to be taking ID seriously. And that gives them a credibility in the public (the voting public!) mind. ID has played this public relations game to the hilt.
 
We worry about the credibility of ASA but it already has little credibility beyond our own membership. ASA was once the only faith/science game in town, but that is no longer true. People have only so much time to spend, and ASA's seeming inability to get off the fence on virtually any issue (even those resolved 150 years ago) simply makes us irrelevant in both scientific and theological circles.
 
Karl
*****************
Karl V. Evans
cmekve@aol.com
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
To: Freeman, Louise Margaret <lfreeman@mbc.edu>; Randy Isaac <randyisaac@adelphia.net>; asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Sun, 21 May 2006 06:20:49 -0400
Subject: Re: RATE Vol. II

----- Original Message ----- From: "Freeman, Louise Margaret" <lfreeman@mbc.edu>
To: "Randy Isaac" <randyisaac@adelphia.net>; <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2006 9:44 PM
Subject: Re: RATE Vol. II
 
>
>> I had similar visions but I seriously doubt whether it will turn out
>> that way. Despite the clear statements in the summary chapter of the
>> unsolved problems, the final paragraph continues to assert that the
>> groundbreaking new results once again reaffirm the validity of the
>> Bible. Knowing the right answer ahead of time provides confidence that
>> the remaining unsolved problems will be solved. Conferences and books
>> and videos proclaim the result of RATE as showing the validity of the
>> young-earth position. Statements that the RATE scientists published in
>> the $79.99 version of the 800 page technical report won't be read by
>> many people in the pews. They will rely on the translation provided in
>> the "Thousands...Not Billions" book which has the conclusion right in
>> the title. No need to read further.
>>
>> Sadly,
>>
>> Randy
>
> I hope the ASA, the Affiliation of Christian Geologists, etc. will > publish in-depth analyses
> and make it available on their websites. It seems incrdible people could > roll their eyes at
> "walking on ice" explanations yet let several dozen stretches of > fundamental physics laws
> pass without comment.
>
> But by now I should have stopped being surprised.
 
IMO we've reached a point with the age of the earth at which ASA's position of not taking an official stance on disputed matters no longer applies.
There is no scientific dispute about the order of magnitude of the age of the earth. The ASA should take the stance - & take it forcefully - that the earth is billions of years old, and that supposedly scientific claims to the contrary are without merit. Of course this does not mean that a position would be taken on biological evolution.
 
We might lose a few members if we did this. That would be unfortunate but the alternative is for the organization to do nothing effective about this cancer.
 
Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
Received on Mon May 22 18:10:17 2006