Re: [asa] Re: [asa] American Scientific Affiliation * Whatever happened to its mission?

I reckon that the comments on UCD were based on the outlook of leading ASA types including Jack Haas whose letter was quoted by Dembski. To ID the stance taken by ASA members like Jack , Keith Miller, George Murphy et al were the primary targets. Further Bill knows that I am in the CIS not ASA and he edited my critique in Debating Design.

Further most of the posts fall within the range of what ASA members hold as like the CIS the ASA seeks to be open to any who accept its basis, whatever position they take on age, evolution or design.

However the main point is that both O'Leary and Dembski's attacks (and they were attacks not critiques) were on ASA leaders not those who post on this list! They misrepresented Jack's letter to accuse the ASA of attacking fellow Christians , whereas the aim was to correct misunderstandings over deep time by many "lay" Christians. They also misrepresented George's varied writings as if he were undermining Lutheranism. I am afraid this kind of attack goes back to the early 90s and thus the Wedge has been a Wedge between Christians rather than a wedge splitting scientific materialism .

This kind of polarisation does no good whatsoever, especially when Tipler, who is not a Christian is an ally , and Jack and George are foes

Michael
(CIS member)
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: David Buller
  To: Iain Strachan
  Cc: ASA Discussion Group
  Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 3:05 PM
  Subject: Re: [asa] Re: [asa] American Scientific Affiliation * Whatever happened to its mission?

  I've gotten a couple of replies (one offlist, one from Iain Strachan) pointing out how this list occaisionally does personally attack YECists and IDists. However, my point was that it was wrong for Dembski to attack ASA based on the actions of some of the list subscribers who may not even be members of ASA, especially when their actions would not at all be condoned by ASA. Dembski was attacking ASA as an organization for things that ASA does not condone as an organization, things that just creep onto an email discussion group.

  That being said, I would agree that there is some truth about what was said at UcD regarding the list. Things are said here that are not representative of ASA. Here's an idea. Is there any way that the comments of non-members can somehow be distinguished from those of members? I don't mean to alienate non-members, but it might help ASA distance itself from perhaps some of the more extreme views, while also encouraging members to remember who (and Who, capital W) they are representing to the world.

  Just a thougth, but just some "member/associate/nonmember" signature might help avoid some of the misunderstandings that are no doubt being amplified by UcD.

  -David Buller

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Apr 26 12:56:14 2007