>"Outsiders" always have the potential to cause open-minded (whatever that
>means) "insiders" to evaluate the logic of their stance, particularly when
>this position is dictated not by the data, but by the model, as is most
>certainly the case in thinking about origins. Thus, even the Phil Johnsons
>of the world can fulfill a valuable role in science.
So you are saying you can lend a valuable critique of science from a
position of extreme ignorance about science. Interesting! I have to ask
along with Wesley what valuable critique of science--evolution in
particular, I'm sure Johnson will eventually critique brain surgery without
picking up a book on the subject and the world will stand amazed--what
valuable critique of science has Johnson provided? I'm not asking what he
has been saying, Stephen has posted nearly the entirety of his writings to
this list, I'm asking what *effective and useful* critique has he offered?
Susan
----------
"Life itself is the proper binge."
--Julia Child
http://www.telepath.com/susanb/