>Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 21:55:07 +0100
> >At 12:44 23/10/00 -0400, you wrote:
>>Glenn wrote, in part:
>>
>>" As an 8-year survivor of mid-level management I can say this, Dembski has
>>a lot to learn
>>about management..."
>>
>>Glenn -- I read your entire post with keen interest. As you know, you and I
>>don't
>>exactly share some posititions on Dembski, Johnson and the ID project. But
>>when I came on that snippet above, it very well summed up my own reaction
>>to the controversy. My experiences in IBM very much confirm that
>>observation.
>>
>Though I dont buy the ID arguments I respect the ID crowd and thing as one
whose views are close to Van Till can learn much from them. I also think we
should share in Dembski's pain at this time.
>
>Remember that Pennock in the Tower of babel described van Till as brushing
up to creationism. Frankly his book hasnt got a fraction of intellectual
worth of any book by Johnson, Dembski or Behe, as I mad e clear in
metaviews last week in a case of brilliant or terrible timing. I am sick
and tired of those like Pennock and also Eldredge who try to make out IDers
to be coterminous with YEC.
>
>>Keep up the good work from the other side of the big pond, my friend.
>>
>Dont get to cold in that granite city. Did you know Sir Francis Galton
worked out scientifically that women from Aberdeen are the least attractive
in Britain? While in South Africa he also looked at bushwomen's breasts
through his telescope as part of his scientific research and recorded the
measurements!!!!
>
>>My chief interest in the ID project is that it gets a fair hearing with a
>>minimum
>>of personality conflicts and, if it has merit, attains its proper place; if
>>it
>>does not, that it remain an interesting historical footnote, perhaps
>>along the lines of Gosse's OMPHALOS.
>>
>>BTW, I did a lot of historical research on Gosse's OMPHALOS over in the
>>Denver
>>University library last weekend. Read the entire text of FATHER AND SON,
>>written by Gosse's
>>son, Edmund Gosse. I had not realized that when Gosse released OMPHALOS for
>>publication
>>in the fall of 1857 that his wife had died the previous February of cancer;
>>nor had I
>>appreciated the depth of Gosse's fundementalist positions, nor his
>>widespread
>>reputation, both before and after 1857, as a competent and respected
>>scientist. Did you
>>know he is credited with the invention (?) of the acquarium?
>>
>JOHN, Be very careful at taking Father and Son at face value. I think I am
right in saying that it is not strict autobiog/biog but more fictitious
than usual. Edmund is highly inccurate in his presentation of scientists
other than Father Philip. What he says about Richard Owen is patently untrue.
>I reckon this work has done immense damage in imprinting the conflict
scenario for about a century and is the literature equivalent of Ted
Davies' favouritie book Andrew White's The warfare of Scienec with
Theology!! Sorry Ted.
>
>My dauhgter will be studying F & S as part of a univ english coursewhen it
will be read as Accurate !!!! biography and not fiction. It is more of the
latter.
>
>
>>I have, of course, the reprinted OMPHALOS which came out in 1998 and is
>>still in print.
>>I find it interesting reading; I cannot see where my ICR friends
>>(apparently) despise it so much.
>There is a very simple reason why ICR types wont like Omphalos. It takes
the apparrent appearance of history to its logical conclusion in that he
would accept the Cambrian Explosion in 555 my but actually it only appeared
the other day. All oppoistion to "Unif " geology and evolution has gone as
has Flood geology etc.
>And one cannot get away from Charles Kingsley's charge that Gosse makes
God a liar.
>
>
>>
>>John
>>
>>
>Sorry to give a load of drivel from Glenn's side of the pond.
>
>Michael
Michael Roberts,
Chirk Vicarage,
Trevor Road
Chirk, Wrexham
LL14 5HD
Wales
United Kingdom
Phone 01691-778519
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 23 2000 - 17:19:59 EDT