Re: [asa] Theistic Evolutionists Clos e Ranks — Let the Bloodletting Begin!

Dembski is "sort of" going after TEs yet again:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/theoevo-vs-id-hey-who-started-this-anyway/

But not really, because at the 99% level he is going after Ken Miller. I
talked with Miller not long ago. He said (paraphrasing) "Even my friends
call me a theistic evolutionist, *but I am not a theistic evolutionist*."

So Dembski is bashing TEs—by using quotes from Miller—who by his own words
is *not* a TE. It makes no sense.

David Heddle
Associate Professor of Physics
Christopher Newport University, &
The Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility

http://helives.blogspot.com

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 10:03 AM, David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Right. We all know that the history of "war" in the Church is long, sordid
> and sad. Sigh.
>
> As to name calling here -- yes its different because it's not a major
> "movement" website and the name-callers weren't public figures. It's also
> significantly different because when I complained to the ASA leadership,
> they reprimanded the person and there were both public apologies and private
> reconciliation.
>
> I don't often agree with Ed Brayton, but he's spot on about this one,
> unfortunately:
> http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/06/dembskis_latest_silliness_1.p
> hp#more
>
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 11:32 PM, Stephen Matheson <smatheso@calvin.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> David O. asks:
>> "What I don't understand is, why respond this way? Why not let a soft
>> answer turn away wrath?"
>>
>> I assume that David is referring to the disturbing words of Bill Dembski.
>> And I think the answer to David's question is very clear. Indeed, I don't
>> think Dembski left any doubt. If the question is "why not let a soft answer
>> turn away wrath?" the answer is "because WAR IS THE GOAL." In fact,
>> Dembski's crazed rage is so unrelated to the actual words to which he is
>> "responding" that I think it's reasonable to assume that he wants nothing
>> more than an "ugly war" and is willing to set aside both rudimentary ethics
>> and basic reason in that wicked pursuit.
>>
>> How sad that the regular defenders of ID on this listserv haven't stepped
>> forward to condemn Dembski's virulent speech. It's not too late, and now is
>> the time. I'm afraid that Bill Dembski is beyond our help, but those who
>> might look to the ASA for leadership/guidance on how to discuss design and
>> natural explanation, in the context of Christian unity and devotion to the
>> Creator, can be expected to carefully observe our response to the
>> viciousness of his rhetoric.
>>
>> For Christ's sake, let's make it clear that Dembski's behavior is the
>> antithesis of the ASA's basic values, and that no matter what we might think
>> of the proposals of the ID movement, we will never countenance such
>> destructively malicious conduct in the Lord's name.
>>
>> Steve Matheson
>>
>> P.S. David, I'm sorry that you've been called names here, and if I'd been
>> here I would have strongly condemned it. But we're in a different galaxy
>> here, don't you think?
>>
>> >>> "David Opderbeck" <dopderbeck@gmail.com> 06/15/08 7:33 PM >>>
>> What I don't understand is, why respond this way? Why not let a soft
>> answer
>> turn away wrath? The LAST thing the Church needs is an additional ugly
>> war
>> between two "camps" that really have more in common than not at the end of
>> the day.
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 6:45 PM, Dave Wallace <wmdavid.wallace@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/theistic-evolutionists-close-ranks-let-the-bloodletting-begin/
>> >
>> > Quote from Dembski:
>> >
>> > You know, I would be happy to sit down with theistic evolutionists and
>> > discuss our differences. I think they are wrong to baptize Darwin's
>> theory
>> > as God's mode of creation. But I don't think they are immoral or
>> > un-Christian for holding their views.
>> >
>> > It seems to me that in earlier parts of his posting he did question or
>> come
>> > close to questioning the faith of ECs. Did not people like Ted, Rich
>> and
>> > other try to have a dialogue a few years back on UCD and get booted and
>> had
>> > their Christianity doubted, or am I becoming senile. Miller may well
>> have
>> > gone too far in his attack on ID but Dembski's taring all of us the way
>> he
>> > does seems very unfair.
>> > Could someone please explain how if ID is supposed to be religiously
>> > neutral, this post belongs on UcD.
>> > Dave W (ASA member)
>> >
>> >
>> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> David W. Opderbeck
>> Associate Professor of Law
>> Seton Hall University Law School
>> Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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.
Received on Tue Jun 17 15:34:24 2008