>
> Lloyd Elby wrote:
>
> Here I don't understand your objection. It seems to me that
> all of my statements 1 through 5 are true. I know that some
> Christians deny the truth of one or more of them. But so
> what? They are wrong to do so. No useful discussion can
> occur between groups if one group denies obvious facts. In
> that sense, some Christians cannot participate in a useful
> discussion of this issue, and they fully deserve the
> contempt and dismissal of proponents of evolution.
>
> Contempt and dismissal from opposing views, eh? Sounds to
> me like someone being passionate about defending their
> "faith". Maybe Lloyd has created a new political label -
> Left Wing Religious Fundamentalist.
>
> There has been a sincere and informative discussion for the
> last several months. I, a YEC, have appreciated those who
> have answered my posted questions with respect, research,
> and humor. It has been most enjoyable and has kept my mind
> open to others who have obviously spent much more time than
> myself into researching this subject. There is no need for
> the bigotry displayed above. There is no room here for the
> "I'm right - you're wrong because I say it is so" attitude.
> Not only does it detract from the discussion it displays a
> childishness in the individual.
I'm not interesting in upholding any "I'm right and you're wrong because I
say so" position, and if I do so or have done so, I apologize.
I'm interested in doing at least three things.
First, specifying as clearly as possible what evolution (or Darwinism or
evolutionism or whatever term you wish to use) is -- what claims it makes,
so we (all of us, whatever our views or ideologies) can be clear about
what we are talking about. (Because I think the creation/evolution
"debate" -- it isn't really a debate, but more of a shouting match or
brawl -- is nearly always conducted with participants talking past each
other because they are unclear about what one another is saying.)
Second, investigating which of those sub-claims (that make up evolution)
are true (insofar as we can establish truth), which are false (ditto), and
which are indeterminate (i.e., we don't know whether they're true or
false).
Third, I want to see how far we can get toward a resolution of the
disagreement.
I'm intersted in other things too -- among them, the more general
science/religion interaction (or war or whatever) -- but that's too much
to attempt here.
In order to carry out this (i.e., the program I've sketched) in a
productive way, we need people to be scrupulously honest and to be willing
to acknowledge and follow facts. I'm not dictating that my points 1-5 are
true. You, or anyone, is welcome to show where any of those alleged facts
is not a fact. Perhaps I was too impatient, but I don't think that anyone
who holds to the YEC view is following facts. For that reason, I doubt
that such people have anything to contribute to the creation/evoluution
debate.
I consider it similar to the smoking and health debate. I don't see how
people who refuse to admit that there is any link at all between smoking
and lung cancer have anything useful to contribute to the smoking and
health debate.
Lloyd Eby