Was anybody but me a little bothered by the report on the recent NTSE
> conference in the latest ASA Newsletter? The report seemed to be mostly
> "cheerleading" for the directions of the conference. I remember the
> discussion we had on this listserver at the time, and there was a wide
> diversity of opinion. Yet the only bit of all that reflected in the
> Newsletter account is the brief mention that Joel Cannon was "disturbed
> by Johnson's 'sales pitch'."
First, thanks for the feedback on the ASA Newsletter. It's the only way I
have of knowing how its contents are being received. As for the article in
question:
1. The conference was a significant sci/rel event and I covered it because
of that. Its organizer is an ASAer. My news sources were taken from three
ASAers, as stated in the article. Most of the published material came from
Koons and Burgeson, based on the quality and depth of their reports.
2. Overall, I receive more news material from the IDT crowd than from
others, and this is reflected in the Newsletter. Right now, the IDT
movement is apparently making more news than others in the sci/rel area. If
I am missing something big out there, let me know of it, please.
3. The Scott article provides a wider coverage of the Controversy
(creation/evolution) than IDT only. I am open to news material from any
source. If you (pl.) have material to send, I will give it the same
consideration as any other.
I have recently gotten my first GOOD Internet connection, out here in the
wilds of NW PA. Please send material to: dfeucht@toolcity.net
I am appreciative of any material I get. I have been receiving generally
high-quality source material, and selectivity is my greatest task.
Best regards,
Dennis Feucht.
ASAN Editor