In a message dated 9/12/2000 10:16:10 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
Susan-Brassfield@ou.edu writes:
<< Bertvan:
>You not only don't believe in design; you are offended that anyone else
>believe it. Right? As an ID supporter I might agree that naturalistic
>explanations might be possible. The question is, which are the most likely
>explanations? Do you allow any difference of opinion there?
FMAJ doesn't have the power to allow or disallow any opinion. I think what
you are really saying is "disagree and then shut up."
>>
The tone set by Bertvan is somewhat disappointing. But it might be hard to
hear people raise valid arguments against ID. But if Bertvan accepts ID and
design on faith then there should be no conflict.
<< The most likely explanations are not to your taste >>
Indeed, I am addressing the use and abuse of ID in science.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Sep 12 2000 - 23:01:13 EDT