>>Bertvan: What puzzles me is this emotional opposition to anyone
>>even considering ID. ID supporters acknowledge RM&NS as
>>a legitimate theory -- supported by evidence. Some of them
>> even believe it played a part in evolution.
FMAJ
>Does that mean that science should accept ID just because ID
>accepts some of science? Of course not. As long as ID remains
>a faith issue like in your case, I have no problems with ID but ID
> is not just a faith issue anymore. ID'ers are trying to introduce ID
>into the science curriculum.
Bertvan:
"Science" doesn't reject or accept anything. Individual scientists do.
Indeed, please share your knowledge with SEJONES since he seems confused
about Darwinism in this aspect.
Bertvan: Whether you accept or reject design in nature should be entirely
up to you.
Yep, unless of course you use it to get it introduced into science curriculum
then it becomes an issue that is not entirely up to you anymore.
Bertvan: The more you try to keep it out of the classroom, the more
interest it will
arouse. Therefore I support all attempts to suppress it.
Interest will die when the people realize that ID is not living up to its
claims. But the fact that something is controversial does not mean that it
should be discussed in the classroom. Certainly not in a science curriculum.
I hope you are not seriously making the suggestion that one should teach ID
just because it is controversial and unproven as a science or that one should
not attempt to 'suppress' it because of these reasons?
That would allow any pseudo-scientific claim into our science curriculum.
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path: <evolution-owner-FMAJ1019=aol.com@lists.calvin.edu>
Received: from rly-yb04.mx.aol.com (rly-yb04.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.4])
by air-yb03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:06:51
-0400
Received: from lists.calvin.edu (udomo3.calvin.edu [153.106.4.240]) by rly-
yb04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:06:39 -0400
Received: (qmail 3334 invoked by uid 27); 10 Sep 2000 20:06:10 -0000
Delivered-To: evolution@lists.calvin.edu
Received: (qmail 3328 invoked from network); 10 Sep 2000 20:06:10 -0000
Received: from ursa.calvin.edu (153.106.4.1)
by udomo3.calvin.edu with SMTP; 10 Sep 2000 20:06:10 -0000
Received: from imo-r06.mx.aol.com (imo-r06.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.6])
by ursa.calvin.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with SMTP id e8AK6Z502568
for <evolution@calvin.edu>; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:06:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from Bertvan@aol.com
by imo-r06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v28.15.) id e.ba.ab6582a (2169)
for <evolution@calvin.edu>; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:06:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: Bertvan@aol.com
Message-ID: <ba.ab6582a.26ed43bc@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 16:06:20 EDT
Subject: Piecemeal genetic differences as support for macroevolution
To: evolution@calvin.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.1 for Windows sub 34
Sender: evolution-owner@lists.calvin.edu
Precedence: bulk
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 10 2000 - 16:11:29 EDT