>> Phil Johnson wrote:
>> "That very point was the theme of a remarkable lecture given by Colin
>> Patterson at the American Museum of Natural History in 1981...His
>> lecture compared creationism (not creation-science) with evolution,
>> and characterized both as scientifically vacuous concepts which are
>> held primarily on the basis of faith....Patterson came under heavy
>> fire from
>> Darwinists after somebody circulated a bootleg transcript of the
>> lecture, and he eventually disavowed the whole business."
>> (Johnson P.E., "Darwin on Trial", Inter VarsityPress: Downers Grove
>> Ill., Second Edition, 1993, pp9-10)
The creationist involved was Luther Sunderland, so his side of the
story can probably be found in his book "Darwin's Enigma" (which I have
not read). Also, Sunderland and Gary Parker wrote an Impact article for
the ICR in the early 80's about Patterson, which made it sound like
Patterson was on the verge of abandoning evolution.
That was apparently not true. I am told Patterson and Sunderland
exchanged letters in "Creation/Evolution", probably in volumes 4 and/or
5. I think Patterson claims he was misunderstood/misrepresented.
Another source is "Creation or Evolution", by Edward Dodson (Catholic
evolutionist) and George Howe (YEC), both biologists. This book is a
collection of their correspondence. Howe repeated Sunderland's claims,
Dodson contacted Patterson and found that they were incorrect.
Patterson in a letter to Dodson said that he was definitely not a
creationist and was not in sympathy or agreement with their ideas. (I
have the exact quote at home somewhere)
In addition to the claims about evolution, there was also some
ill-feeling about whether Sunderland had committed an ethical breach in
distributing an account of a private talk.
>> Does anyone have a copy of the above transcript, (preferably
>> in electronic form).
I have never seen such. The C/E articles above are probably the best
place to go to get Patterson's side of the story.
I have heard that Patterson's talk was more about the philosophy of how
taxonomy should be done and to what extent it should rely on
evolutionary theory, rather than a repudiation of the idea of evolution
itself. For an example of how other taxonomists have made claims that
can similarly be interpreted as critical of evolution, see the last part
of the chapter "The One True Tree of Life", in "The Blind Watchmaker" by
Dawkins. Like them, Patterson apparently holds an unconventional,
minority view which can sound very anti-evolutionary.
-- Jim Foley Symbios Logic, Fort Collins, COJim.Foley@symbios.com (970) 223-5100 x9765