Re: [asa] public response

What is the context of this discussion? (BTW, McGrath has also clearly
written negative things about ID in his "Dawkins God" book).

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 9:33 PM, Rich Blinne <rich.blinne@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 5:10 PM, Randy Isaac <randyisaac@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Rich,
>> It looks as if at least one person wants to continue an "open and honest
>> debate." I think portions of Jeff's review would be quite relevant here.
>> http://deltackett.com/
>>
>> How can we convey the point that it is not that doubts about evolution,
>> per se, are not acceptable but that it is the quality and method in which
>> those doubts are brought forward. The scientific community would be
>> extremely interested in any data that would alter our understanding in any
>> way. But those skepticisms and questions must go through the same rigor of
>> scientific review and methodology as anything else. And until they do, the
>> doubts are just that, and not legitimate scientific results. Most of all,
>> any attempt to insert such claims that bypasses the normal process is bound
>> to gather pushback.
>>
>> Randy
>>
>
> Here was my response.
>
> Del, thanks for your considered response. Due to the length I will
> address only a couple of points.
>
> "This kind of survey is extremely interesting to me and I would love to see
> the data. How many "scientists" hold to theistic evolution, atheistic
> evolution, or have serious doubts about evolution?"
>
> A grad student, Whitney Gray, decided to contact the list of skeptics of
> evolution from DI's list. He limited himself to the biologists and
> bio-chemists. He asked them all a simple question.
>
> Do you believe in common descent?
>
> All but two answered yes.
>
> Michael Behe gave the following more extended answer:
>
> "Yes, I think we share an ancestor with other primates. However, I don't
> believe that the process leading to the appearance of humans was Darwinian."
>
> Clarifying question: Would it be correct to say that you feel we share a
> common ancestor and through guided mutations and natural selection, humans
> arose?
>
> Answer: Yes, that's right.
>
> Dr. Fred Sigworth denies rejecting Common Descent and recommends TE Ken
> Miller's book Finding Darwin's God.
>
> Dr. Dan Kuebler denies rejecting Common Descent and evolution and asked
> unsuccessfully to be taken off the list.
>
> Professor Paul Koval said in the many public lectures he has given in the
> last 15 years he recalls never saying evolutionary theory is wrong.
>
> You continue, "Then correlate those answers with their various views of
> God, the Bible, etc."
>
> The major books that go against the New Atheism are all by theistic
> evolutionists (Keller, McGrath, D'Souza, and Collins). Yes, Alister McGrath
> from Expelled is a Theistic Evolutionist as well as John Polkinghorne. Here
> is what Polkinghorne has to say about evolution and intelligent design:
>
> "Evolution clearly happens and there is very strong genetic evidence for
> the evolutionary connection of most animals including man. …
> Similarly, the idea proposed by some ID advocates that certain biological
> systems couldn't possibly have evolved is almost certainly wrong."
>
> The new Evangelical Manifesto says the following:
>
> "All too often we have disobeyed the great command to love the Lord our God
> with our hearts, souls, strength, and minds, and have fallen into an
> unbecoming anti-intellectualism that is a dire cultural handicap as well as
> a sin. In particular, some among us have betrayed the strong Christian
> tradition of a high view of science, epitomized in the very matrix of ideas
> that gave birth to modern science, and made themselves vulnerable to
> caricatures of the false hostility between science and faith. By doing so,
> we have unwittingly given comfort to the unbridled scientism and naturalism
> that are so rampant in our culture today."
>
> For further historical information concerning evangelical support of
> evolutionary biology I would recommend the book by David Livingstone called
> "Darwin's Forgotten Defenders".
>
> You have asked a very important question because at the heart of who we are
> as evangelicals is fidelity to both the living and written Word. As brothers
> in the Lord we must always challenge each other to find the truth as iron
> sharpens iron. So, in that spirit, my question to you is why do you promote
> the work of Jonathan Wells who is a Moonie?
>
> Your Brother,
> Rich
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.