RE: [asa] EU proposed regulation of creationism and ID

Michael,

Do you ascribe to the following statement I made and if not why not? Please do not hide behind the constant silly criticism that you make regarding my views of science. I am practicing scientist, are you?

"In this view, there was the Big Bang and here we are now. What is the history from such initial condition to the present condition? Well, dynamics based on purely physical entities. Do you ascribe to that?"

Moorad

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of Michael Roberts
Sent: Sun 9/23/2007 2:02 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] EU proposed regulation of creationism and ID

John

I find Dave's comment quite reasonable. I have read the EU's statement and
find very little to complain about as the only minor point is on the 19th
century Darwin squabbles. I shall give a personal European perspective.

I was at University reading science from 65-68, first chemistry then geology
(sorry Jack I am a turncoat) and all that time dabbled in Christianity
tasting what was on offer at the Christian Union but not being convinced and
involved in my college chapel group and never went to chapel. I became a
Christian in my last term as I graduated in geology. No one ever said there
was a conflict of Science and religion and I never heard of YEC. Off I went
to Africa got a call to the ministry and then went to L'Abri in Switzerland
before seminary to learn from Schaeffer and had YEC thrust down my
throat.Back in Britain no one knew about YEC in the Anglican church and I
was dismissed about my concerns but some of my Oxford friends had fallen for
it, but not someone called Denis Alexander. Apart from ultra evangelicals no
one bothered with YEC until the Arkansas trial in 1981. Then some atheists
began to get stroppy about the church, but not many.

From then on as YEC grew so did scientific atheism culminating the antics of
Dawkins. Atkins and to a lesser extent by Steve Jones. The militant atheism
postdates the rise of YEC in Britain. Further it has become an issue with
all scientists in Britain whereas it was not before 1980.

Now with the nonsense of teaching YEC in the Vardy sponsored schools of
Northeast England (partly co-founded by two Anglican clergy, one a fellow
student and the other a teacher at seminary - Curry and Holloway), more agro
came up and this has been enhanced by the recent Truthinscience caper with
all its inaccurate material to be taught in schools.

Over on the continent things were slower as evangelicals are very few - but
growing fast, but it has been the Altas of Creation which has caused the
problem.

Of course not all responses to YEC and ID are accurate and some lump all
Christians and evangelicals as anti-science, but that shows the success of
creationist propaganda.

However the response by Freerepublic and Uncommon dissent etc is worse than
inaccurate and strident - but then what do you expect?

ID and YEC not only lacks any kind of integrity but it is also whipping
unnecessary anti-Christian feeling and is doing immense damage to the cause
of Christ both by causing divisions between Christians and by making
Christianity a laughing stock to outsiders.

Also Moorad wrote ;

There are those who are convinced that evolutionary theory will explain
everything, including how intelligence arose and why free will is an
illusion. My question will debunk this nonsense. You may not be one of
those; however, there are many for whom science answers EVERYTHING. In this
view, there was the Big Bang and here we are now. What is the history from
such initial condition to the present condition? Well, dynamics based on
purely physical entities. Do you ascribe to that?

Moorad
 I cant answer his question as I simply do not understand what he is saying,
but then I normally don't. The sooner he grasps the totality of science and
gets out of his little physics box the better

Michael

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Walley" <john_walley@yahoo.com>
To: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 11:50 AM
Subject: RE: [asa] EU proposed regulation of creationism and ID

This is ridiculous.

To play the victim of hate just because someone rightly points out that
there is more to our responsibilities of defending the faith than bashing ID
and agreeing with atheists is actually quite childish.

I will take this then that you simply have no other grown-up response.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of D. F. Siemens, Jr.
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2007 11:24 PM
To: john_walley@yahoo.com
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] EU proposed regulation of creationism and ID

Looks to me as though I've found the hatred, and it isn't in the council
document.
Dave (ASA)

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 19:09:27 -0400 "John Walley" <john_walley@yahoo.com>
writes:
>
> Granted these guidelines may not have turned out to be as nefarious
> as the
> first alarmist reports indicated, but I think it is naïve to assume
> that the
> trend of reducing the wonder and awe of our observable universe down
> to only
> natural causes is so innocent.
>
> I think the earlier observation that a lot of these alarmist
> reactions are
> "really complaints about not being able to exercise dominant
> cultural and
> political power like the church once did" is relevant and valid, and
> I think
> it helps pinpoint some of the disconnect on this list between TE and
> ID.
>
> I think ID is correct in recognizing that the power vacuum created
> by the
> church losing its influence in society is largely being filled by a
> competing atheistic philosophy. Granted the way to counter this is
> not
> misrepresenting philosophy as science, but ID is at least right in
> recognizing the growing threat of this ascendancy of atheism in our
> culture.
>
> Sometimes I get the impression here that if only all the
> creationists and
> IDer's would get their science right and apologize for all the
> confusion and
> harm they have caused over the years, then all the conflict between
> science
> and faith would vanish and we would all live happily ever after.
> There is a
> double standard in putting the onus of this problem solely on the
> likes of
> Denyse and Behe but Dawkins and PZ Myers get passes.
>
> I think the downside of this oversimplistic view of the world is
> that
> obsessed ID bashing TE's run the risk of being used by the atheists
> like
> Stalin used his domestic communist sympathizers during the cold war.
>
>
> John
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]
> On
> Behalf Of D. F. Siemens, Jr.
> Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2007 1:50 PM
> To: john_walley@yahoo.com
> Cc: d.nield@auckland.ac.nz; gmurphy@raex.com; Mahaffy@dordt.edu;
> asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: [asa] EU proposed regulation of creationism and ID
>
>
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 00:37:26 -0400 "John Walley"
> <john_walley@yahoo.com>
> writes:
> > Nevermind the document. When Jesus said that since the world hated
>
> > Him, it
> > would hate us too, is that the product of imagination?
> >
> > John
> >
> When you specify the explicit part of the statement that expresses
> hatred, you'll have a point. Until then, you have a vivid
> imagination.
> Dave (ASA)
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun, 23 Sep 2007 14:29:53 -0400