> I agree as well, and heck, I'm not even a believer (or an unbeliever).
[...]
> Then again, considering there seems to be no idea
> of what to do once one invokes a PC explanation, or how one develops an
> explanation for the patterns of life using PC as a starting point, or
> even whether it is necessary to invoke PC at this time, I wonder what
> is to be scientifically gained from promoting PC. Thus, I really do
> not understand the motivations for marginalizing the scientific
> methodology of TEs.
Greetings Tim,
Lovely post. But let me give you a little "insider" commentary on the PC
gang and their motivation. It is not scientists like you or me or our
colleagues who conjure
up the PC view. It comes from those well away from the test tubes, the
fossils and the HOX genes. It is the Stephen Jones' and Phil Johnsons of
the world, and their motivation is utterly APOLOGETIC. First, apologetic
to their own personal faith; second, apologetic in defending the faith to
the non-believing world. Tossed into this is a hermeneutical program
regarding Genesis 1-11. Their logic (and I might add mine as well not so
long ago) is that since rationality and science are epistemic values
in modern thought, then the Word of God must be both rationality and
scientifically congruent. As a result, since God is seen as creating by
fiat and de novo act in Genesis 1, then our science must reflect this
interventistic method, thus the creation of PC (This is nicely reflected
in Stephen
Jones' comment to the effect that there are miracles from the Book of
Genesis to the Book of Revelation, thus PC is God's method of creation).
So Tim, it is a poor reading of the Genesis text, a lack of a serious
scientific education and experience, and a genuine Christian apologetic
concern that make up some of the important factors in PC.
As a Christian I am concerned in sharing my faith with you, and my prayer
is that you consider this faith seriously. But PLEASE don't conflate the
Jones and Johnson "folk science" with the faith. You know it is crap, and
I know it is crap. Both these guys are scientific and theological
amateurs, and though I would be the first to commend their Jesus to you,
look toward those Christians who have dealt with the more difficult matters
of science and theology like Terry Gray, Bill Hamilton and Howard Van
Till.
Regards,
Denis
----------------------------------------------------------
Denis O. Lamoureux DDS PhD PhD (cand)
Department of Oral Biology Residence:
Faculty of Dentistry # 1908
University of Alberta 8515-112 Street
Edmonton, Alberta Edmonton, Alberta
T6G 2N8 T6G 1K7
CANADA CANADA
Lab: (403) 492-1354
Residence: (403) 439-2648
Dental Office: (403) 425-4000
E-mail: dlamoure@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca
"In all debates, let truth be thy aim, and endeavor to gain
rather than expose thy opponent."
------------------------------------------------------------