>If *unsupervised* and *impersonal* don't rule out TE, then look at the
>conspicuous absence of the supernatural in the list of that which *affects*
>evolution: natural selection, chance, historical contingencies and
>changing environments.
>So if you're in the TE camp, please consider rejecting TE on the basis that
>it refutes itself. Or at least wait to affirm TE until after you aquire
>cultural authority and use it to change the meaning of the word evolution.
>
>There is a word for God having something to do with the origin and
>devolopment of life: It's *creation*.
Oh come now, Neal!
Why should you or I let the NABT define evolution for us? NABT wants to
attach a nonsupernatural metaphysical mechanism to a scientific model that
says NOTHING about natural or supernatural mechanisms. They abuse
scientific theory by making a metaphysical extension from it.
In any debate, it helps if you can be the one to define the terms. I reject
their definition and the importance you place on it in defining what TE is
about.
Cheers
Steve
__________________________________________________________________________
Steven S. Clark, Ph.D. Phone: (608) 263-9137
Associate Professor FAX: (608) 263-4226
Dept. of Human Oncology and email: ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu
UW Comprehensive Cancer Ctr
University of Wisconsin
Madison, WI 53792
"...a university is a collection of disparate academic entrepreneurs united
only by a common grievance over parking." Clark Kerr, former Chancellor
of the Univ. of California
__________________________________________________________________________