RE: [asa] Fwd: Denyse reviews Collins

I am not defending ID but exposing the fallacy of your argument against
it since your arguments apply equally to Darwinian Theory of evolution.
The theory of how the dinosaurs became extinct by a meteor impact in the
Yucatan peninsula http://www.redorbit.com/news/display/?id=747011# has
nothing to do with evolutionary theory. If Newton did not know how the
solar system came into being, evolutionary theory certainly does not
explain that either from the assumptions evolutionary theory makes.
Similarly, with all the examples you give. Get real man!

Moorad

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Gregory Arago
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 4:54 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Fwd: Denyse reviews Collins

"My view on this is well known: ID is not now, nor has it yet been, an
alternative to evolution. It does not offer (e.g.) a theory about
when/how dinosaurs became extinct; about when/how the solar system
came into being; about how old the universe and the earth are, etc.,
etc. Unless/until
it does offer specifics on points such as these, it won't be a candidate
to be called an alternative theory--I'm a strict Kuhnian (see p. 77 in
"Structure of Scientific Revolutions") on this point. Science abhors
a(n)
(intellectual) vacuum, and a widely accepted picture of the story of
everything is not about to go away, no matter how severely it is
criticized, until an alternative story of everything is available to
take its
place." - Ted

    Most IDists accept evolution to a limited degree. However, none
(afaik) are 'universal evolutionists' - they agree that evolution is
limited and indeed is not a 'story of everything.' Thus, IDists are
sometimes labelled as anti-evolutionists because it is convenient,
especially in America, to do so.

    Does Ted Davis in his heart of hearts really believe that
evolution is (or even could be) a 'story of everything' or is he just
repeating the mantra of secular philosophers/historians of science?

    Need an 'alternative to evolution' speak about the things Ted
highlights - dinosaurs, solar system, universe and earth? It seems to
me that it need not do so. To a hegemonic theory of evolution that
privileges natural sciences, perhaps. But to the theories of
evolution put forth by many non-naturalistic scholars, for example,
anthropologists, psychologists, sociologists and political
scientists, an 'alternative to evolution' could just involve those
disciplines.

    On Denyse's reading of Collins - she obviously represents a
journalist's perspective, not that of a scientist. In this role she
reaches more eyeballs than perhaps many of the academics on this list
combined. I take it that she criticizes Collins simply because he is
not an IDist, since it has become obvious that she doesn't really
want to follow the evidence where it leads...if it doesn't support
ID. Notice she is now paired with Dembski at uncommondescent.com?
Thus she has become an ideologue who profits from the controversy. I
wonder if anyone at ASA is profiting from their defense of TE against
ID. Maybe in lawyer fees.

    Arago

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Nov 29 12:57:12 2006