<<Come on, Jim. If you disagree, then feel free to explain why. Why can't I
critique your opinion without attracting this sort of rhetoric? It is too
easy to pick on those in my profession with labels like "priesthood" when we
offer advice based on our expertise with which you may disagree.>>
Well, I was responding to your "don't fully understand" remark (don't you
think that rehtoric is itself a bit condescending?) But I raised the heat of
the remarks a bit, so I apologize.
<<It seems to me that the authentic realist won't make more out of the data
than the data warrant. This is a (not unreasonable) criticism you place on
evolutionists, but then you commit the same error here. I don't deny that
the potential martian life can fit your favorite model, but it also fits the
evolution model--more importantly this new data is not sufficient to reject
either model.>>
I committed no error. All I said was this data DOES NO HARM to Intelligent
Design Theory. You actually agree with me on this, as your last sentence
indicates.
Jim