> Greetings and Salutations,
>
> Last night I was reflecting on the state of affairs on the Reflector.
> I have come to a number of conclusions:
>
> On Thomas Moore:
>
> Thomas Moore has tenaciously argued that evolutionists do not have
> a history of interpreting their data with Darwinist bias. I have
> a few final comments on this:
No, that's not what I was arguing. What I was arguing is that slow
changes in thinking often have very good reasons for being slow. No
lying by scientists there at all. I'll grant you that the "Darwinist
bias" exists.
>
> 1) If it is true that evolutionists have eliminated their bias
> from their interpretation of the facts, then they have succeeded
> where every other community of human beings united by a common belief
> system have failed. I find this highly doubtful, but extend my conditional
> congratulations.
>
Of course, Darwinism isn't a belief system, nor are darwinists all that
united in the first place. Indeed, I fully expect current evolution
theories to be replaced, one way or the other - just as expect most
theories to be replaced one way or another.
> 2) He has argued that because geologists were slow to accept continental
> drift, this means that all evolution scientists who did not accept evidence
> for stasis or for the Cambrian explosion were not biased. This assumes
> that there was no bias on behalf of geologists studying the motion of the
> continents. Another proposition I find highly doubtful.
>
No. What I was arguing is that unless you have good, strong evidence,
which the Cambrian had lacked, and some would argue, still lacks, the
concervative view is to wait before changing your mind. This is quite
legit, and in some ways required.
Take this issue for example. A friend of mine has discovered what
appears to be bee nests in the Chinle formation in Arizona. This puts
the appearance of bees much earlier than previously thought. By your
standards, I should automatically accept that they are bees nests and
that the history of bees must be re-adjusted. The conservative view, of
course, is to ask, "Did you find any bee parts?" The answer is no. In
fact, this means that only partial evidence of possible bees exists for
the Chinle, but nothing difinitive - should I still automatically assume
that these are bee nests? Or should I take the concervative view that
yes, they might be bee nests but we must wait for more evidence.
In my book, the conservative view is often the best way to go, which is
what I was arguing. In fact, I would argue it shows more bias to jump on
the idea that they were bee nests than to wait for more data.
> On Lying Evolutionists:
>
> I overstated my case against the evolutionary community. First in the use of
> the rape analogy and second in the categoral indictment of individual
> evolutionists. I believe there is a "conspiracy" but it is spiritual in nature
> and the "conspirator" is perfectly capable of using those who do their best
> to be intellectually honest. I apologize to those offended by this poorly
> conceived remark.
This is what generated my strong remark in my private mail to you which
ended up on the reflector. Unfortunately, I think the inflamed tone of
my response has generated an inflamed tone for the last few days. I also
apologize to those offened on the reflector. But I would also
specifically apologize to Rob for my tone, for I think it's led to some
misunderstanding of my case (and probably his), and that it's not
conducive for good discussion.
>
> Forward
>
> Over the next few months, I will be posting excerpts from a pamphlet that I
> hope to publish. I hope to start next week and post according to the
> following outline:
>
This isn't meant as a negative comment, but your outline looks a bit long
for a pamphlet. If you are going to cover such a range of topics, why
not use a longer format? Or, generate a series of pamphlets?
Tom
*****************************************************************************
*** Thomas L. Moore mooret@gas.uug.arizona.edu ***
*** Paleoclimatology Research Lab. mooret@aruba.ccit.arizona.edu ***
*** Department of Geosciences mooret@ccit.arizona.edu ***
*** University of Arizona ***
*****************************************************************************