At 02:55 PM 09/30/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>http://home.flash.net/~mortongr/wacoconf.htm
>
>Very interesting reading
yes indeed. Glenn Morton used to be in this group--a Christian theist
arguing the evolutionist viewpoint--and I miss him.
Below is a portion of the conclusion that I liked very much. I very much
agree with this point: "Many in science seem to want to push their
opponents away and not beat them at their own game. That looks and is
tacky." Amen. The ID and other creationist arguments evaporate in the
sunlight. Lenny Flank is an excellent biologist, he's got a wonderfully
informative website, but he *refuses* to engage the scientific arguments
for and against ID, etc. He wastes his time sneering and ridiculing. It
doesn't help. I pleaded with him for quite a while to stop and then left
his group in disgust. He is worse than those scientists who refuse to be
involved in the debate at all. It is time to stop taking the "ignore them
and they'll go away" approach. Yes, we have to keep them out of schools,
because religion doesn't belong in public schools, but the various
permutations of creationism need to be openly debated in the public arena.
And that, boys and girls, is why I am here.
Susan
-------
My personal objection to the ID movement is what was pointed out over and
over throughout the conference during question and answer sessions. They
present no scenario, they don't suggest any new way of doing science, and
they avoid verification and falsification. They want to wind the scientific
world without doing the hard and risky work of actually telling us what
happened. They are a movement without any cause for which to fight. They
have no unifying principle. Because of this, they are a broken reed which
many Christians wish to lean upon. They offer nothing of substance, but like
the young-earth creationists they just offer wrong reasons to disbelieve
what modern science is showing. Christian acceptance of this movement will
be viewed poorly in future years.</P>
<P> What needs to be done is present carefully crafted arguments in
forums just like the one that they put on at Baylor. They, unlike the Ken
Ham and ICR crowd, at least were willing to invite their opponents to the
table in a non-adversarial/non-spectacle format. Many in science seem to
want to push their opponents away and not beat them at their own game. That
looks and is
tacky.</P>
</P>John Baumgardner's comment that the naturalists were dominating the
conference was a telling comment about how the theist position fared during
this conference. It was sad to see Steve Meyer, a friend with whom I worked
at ARCO back in the 80s standing there trying to avoid aswering a question
by saying that his argument was restricted to the origin of life, and saying
it over and over. It did not show any robustness to this thesis. It was sad
to see Behe not answer a question seriously when he was asked what he would
want science to do differently. (He was asked what he would do if he had
control of all the funding. Ans. keep it himself. And then he did say that
he wanted someone else to do research in a lab to support his theory. Why
wouldn't he want to do his own research?) It was sad to see the 'deer in
headlights' look on Dembski's face as he faced a forest of hands wanting to
criticize his theory. And the critics were those like Ide Trotter and John
Baumgardner who should have agreed with him. And I would point you to this,
from a Christian mother who home schools and with whom I am now having a
conversation via e-mail. She didn't want her name used because she didn't
want any crank e-mail. (She is a bit afraid of the mail she might get from
Christians on this!).</P>
<P>She said:</P>
<P>> Even churches that don't support one view over another don't bother to
> address the faith-shaking issues that college kids will face: I can
> imagine many of those professors we heard at the conference skinning
> alive the believers in their classes. Churches do a good job of giving
> kids the spiritual tools they need for a fulfilling relationship with
> Jesus, helping them to steer their spiritual boat, so to speak, but they
> don't give them any intellectual tools. Steering the boat becomes moot if
> the the believer's boat is on the verge of sinking.</P>
<P>>I am not sure why youth directors don't perceive this need except that
>perhaps the kids themselves don't perceive it. In the warm embrace of
>their youth group, they aren't facing many intellectual challenges and so
>don't even know about the minefields that await them. Perhaps the
>majority of youth don't plan to do much thinking at college anyway. I
>don't know, but from your website and my own anecdotal experience, I
>think this is an issue that churches need to address.</P>
<P>The conference was a success as far as educating the Christian community
but
not in the way that the organizers thought it would. This mother, who is a
home schooler is frustrated and scared by what Christian education is doing
to her children! And so should we all be scared.</P>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 30 2000 - 18:04:46 EDT