>Bertvan
>Hi Cliff H,
>My question was what is the belief that opposes ID. From your reply I assume
>it is that life arose through purely naturalistic means. I am not "opposed"
>to such a theory. I just don't believe it. Are you willing to put everyone
>who is skeptical of abiogenesis in the ID camp? We would be delighted. In
>any case, I encourage anyone who believes life arose naturalistically to
>pursue it vigorously. I question anyone's right to declare abiogenesis a
>fact until it has been demonstrated.
I thought asserting things as facts without evidence was your God- (or
whoever) given right! Everybody has to have hard evidence for their beliefs
but Bertvan. Nice work if you can get it!
>(I haven't heard any ID advocates
>seriously pushing space aliens. That's mainly done by ID critics looking for
>a straw man.)
I thought you had read Hoyle and very much admired him. That aliens did it
is his favorite explanation for life on earth. (Of course, he also believes
that insects are more intelligent than we are and just keeping it a secret
from us dumb humans.)
>Cliff:
>>Of course, the fact that almost all of the main proponents of ID
>>(Johnson, Dembski, Meyer, Pearcey) are
> >evangelical Christians should give it away.
>
>Bertvan:
>This is pure McCarthyism, in my opinion. While you say you have nothing
>against God, I assume you do have something against evangelical Christians.
>(I do acknowledge that there are probably few atheists supporting ID.)
McCarthyism is a government persecution thing. Johnson, Dembsky, et al. are
pushing the ID agenda because they are evangelical Christians. They make no
secret about it. Acknowledging the obvious is not persecution.
>Bertvan:
>Most people are either atheists or accept some religious belief. We
>agnostics are a tiny minority.
there are many more agnostics than atheists. Most people prefer to say "I
don't know" than go out on a limb and say "I know there is no such thing as
the supernatural."
>However I suspect many of us will be
>attracted to the ID movement.
Kinda doubt it. The agnostic position is "I don't know" (that is literally
what the word "agnostic" means.) ID has no scientific basis. It is a
belief. To be an ID adherent you have to believe--with no
verification--that some supernatural agency exists which is powerful enough
to interfere with the reproduction of every genome for the last 3.5 billion
years. That's a bit of a lump to swallow for agnostics.
>Has it occurred to you that we might be using
>them for our own ends? You see, I don't really have any objections to
>Darwinists, or anyone else, "distorting science and the truth to manipulate
>people and the society they live in".
If you really believe "Darwinists" are doing that you SHOULD object (and
expose some acutal instances of it) or you are as immoral as they are.
Susan
----------
The most important human endeavor is the striving for morality in our
actions. Our inner balance and even our very existence depend on it. Only
morality in our actions can give beauty and dignity to life.
--Albert Einstein
http://www.telepath.com/susanb/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 30 2000 - 12:56:35 EDT