Re: Independent support for Behe's thesis?

From: glenn morton (mortongr@flash.net)
Date: Thu Jun 01 2000 - 16:49:00 EDT

  • Next message: glenn morton: "Re: Independent support for Behe's thesis?"

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Lawrence Johnston" <johnston@uidaho.edu>
    To: "glenn morton" <mortongr@flash.net>; <asa@calvin.edu>
    Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 2:44 PM
    Subject: Re: Independent support for Behe's thesis?
    > Greetings, Glenn -
    > In scientific discourse it is frowned upon to use "Ad Hominem" arguments.
    It's not
    > as much fun, but it serves uncovering truth much better to stick to the
    evidence,
    > even if that means waiting awhile for the evidence to be clarified. Even
    if
    > someone's work is supported by the NIH or NSF we needn't questiion his
    results and
    > conclusions for that reason. Warmest regards, Larry

    I absolutely agree that this is an ad hominem. But I presented it because
    EGM thought that Chen's work was independent of the ID movement. It isn't
    according to that article I cited. In my mind that is relevant to the truth
    or falsity of EGM's claim of independent verification of ID. Seems clear
    that this info refutes the claim of independence.
    glenn

    Foundation, Fall and Flood
    Adam, Apes and Anthropology
    http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm

    Lots of information on creation/evolution



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 02 2000 - 21:48:03 EDT