RE: [asa] Re: Reading Genesis theologically NOT historically

There may be a semantic case of how it is proven, as in "You believe in evolution? Prove it." Then you are like a prosecuting attorney in a courtroom, talking to the jury. The judge tells the jury to examine the evidence, determine the facts from the evidence, then make a verdict. We can do that with evolution. The evidence is the pseudogenes.

This is a different line of 'proving' as is done in philosophy or math.

I guess evolution was literally on trial in the Dover case with ID. It seems to have handily won. Of course, those on the losing side will say it was not a fair trial.

...Bernie

________________________________
From: Dennis Venema [mailto:Dennis.Venema@twu.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 3:17 PM
To: Dave Wallace; Dehler, Bernie
Cc: asa
Subject: Re: [asa] Re: Reading Genesis theologically NOT historically

"Just to be clear I am not saying evolution of complex biological
features is impossible, just not proven yet."

Science doesn't offer "proof." It offers converging lines of evidence supported by experimentation. Not even heliocentrism is "proved."

Dennis

On 07/10/09 2:29 PM, "Dave Wallace" <wmdavid.wallace@gmail.com> wrote:
Just to be clear I am not saying evolution of complex biological
features is impossible, just not proven yet.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Oct 7 18:48:53 2009