For me, this evolution debate is reminiscent of McCarthyism. Your sincerity
and passionate belief in what you claim to defend is obvious. As were those
people who believed Communism was the magic answer to the world's problems,
as well as those who believed it was a powerful, sinister menace hiding under
every bed. I didn't share either belief, but I deplored the tactics of
those who tried to stifle debate by threat and intimidation. I would
probably disagree on details with many of the people who promote the concept
of design. However unless, or until, we have a better idea of what really
happened, each is entitled to their own speculations. As long as the Kansas
school board is denounced as anti intellectual bigots, when they did nothing
more than refuse to indoctrinate children with the belief that random
mutation and natural selection were the universally acknowledged mechanism of
macro evolution, I'll be as passionate as you about this debate. Originally
my skepticism concerned the scientific facts of Darwinism. I'll admit my
passion has been the result of tactics used to defend the theory.
You can not define science as materialism, and also insist that everyone
accept it as absolute truth, never to be questioned. You might believe
passionately in your philosophy, but you have no right to impose it on
anyone. You are certainly free to list the evidence you see for nature being
the result of accidental processes, without plan or purpose. I've said
before, you do a good job of that. Non materialists should also be free to
describe the evidence they see for plan, purpose or design. I happen to find
their arguments more compelling, reasoned, rational and unemotional. If you
define science is materialism, limited to investigation of measurable
physical phenomena, people are justified in protesting it cannot answer the
big questions such as origins, design and purpose. Science often can't be
precise in describing historical events such as evolution. But I'm not even
sure you are entitled to define science for everyone. Maybe scientific truth
and philosophical truth can not be separated. You claim you don't want
religion taught in science classes. I don't want any specific philosophy
taught there as scientific truth.
Bertvan