> We are unable to communicate with the Christian laity because we do not
>badly enough want to. It has nothing to do with the Christian media. We are
>an academic organization that delights in an academic discussion. A good
>clean argument over some Science, Christian esoteria makes us resonate. We
>enjoy it no end. I enjoy it. But the Christian public does not. We have two
>strikes against us when ever we open our mouths to our Christian friends. We
>are "intellectuals" and we are "scientists", both party poison to the
>Christian public. Have Henry Morris and his fellow travelers been able to be
>so successful in cultivating a hearing from the Christian public because of
>their ability to explain the science of creation? I don't think so. They
>have been successful because they have bashed the "atheistic scientists" and
>by defending the Bible from its enemies. Read David Wells. There is a strong
>anti-intellectual current in evangelical Chrisitanity. Cogent and relevant
>explanations of the niceties of TE, ID, OEC, YEC, etc., etc., etc., will not
>cut it.
I agree in part, but my frustration is that there seems to be a double
standard. When Denton or others write whole books filled with detailed
scientific arguments that are very misleading or flat out wrong they are
published without being usbject to critical scientific review. However,
when someone else writes a rebuttal it is dismissed as being too scientific
and technical for the lay public. In other words, if you criticize
evolution anything goes, but if you argue for the standard evolutionary
interpretation you are met with glazed eyes.
Keith
Keith B. Miller
Department of Geology
Kansas State University
Manhattan, KS 66506
kbmill@ksu.ksu.edu
http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~kbmill/