> In view
> of the fact that not all of your beliefs are exactly traditional, I am
> astonished at how intollerant you are of anyone who doens't believe
"random
> mutation and natural selection" is an adequate explanation for the
diversity
> of life.
In what way have I been "intolerant", except to disagree with you in public?
The statement that "'random mutation and natural selection" is an adequate
explanation for the diversity of life" is a scientific statement, not a
religous or philosophical one. Unlike my personal religious beliefs or
yours, this statement can be scientifically validated with evidence, or
invalidated with evidence. Simply saying, "I don't believe it" is
insufficient, because that also means you reject all the evidence that is
used to validate it. As such, it is perfectly reasonable for me to ask why
you reject all that evidence? What do you feel is wrong with it? What
evidence do you have that would invalidate that statement?
I respect your right to believe whatever you want, but if in doing so you
also reject clear scientific evidence, I have the right to challenge that
belief. The same right you have to challenge any belief that you feel
contradicts known scientific evidence.
Kevin L. O'Brien