[Phys-L] Re: prompted by intelligent design

[fizix29 at AOL.COM (Justin Parke)]

I was referring to the fact that the theory of punctuated equilibrium, while not enjoying acceptance, was not criticized for the sole reason that at least the proponent of the theory is "against the creationists".  If the theory is correct, who cares about the creationists, and if it is not, who cares about the creationists?  What is the point of science if not to produce models that are supported by evidence?

Justin Parke
Oakland Mills High School
Columbia, MD


-----Original Message-----
From: Bernard Cleyet <anngeorg@PACBELL.NET>
To: PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU
Sent: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 10:36:43 -0700
Subject: Re: prompted by intelligent design


Justin!

Please explain.

bc

Justin Parke wrote:
>  That sounds more like dogma than science to me.
>
> Justin Parke
> Oakland Mills High School
> Columbia, MD
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bernard Cleyet <anngeorg@PACBELL.NET>
> To: PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU
> Sent: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 15:39:52 -0700
> Subject: Re: prompted by intelligent design
>
>
> Tanks!
>
> SJ Gould's, recently deceased *, punctuated equilibrium, tho having many
> adherents, is still not generally accepted.  However, as one detractor,
> has written, we don't criticize his theory in public "... because he is
> at least on our side against the creationists"
>
> * well, in 2002.
>
> from The Chron. Monday, May 27 2002 p.1 Science
>
> bc, paper monster, who discovers these things when Gate Keeper gets the
> declutter bug.
>
> Shapiro, Mark wrote:
>
>
> > Bernard et al.
> >
> > I posted a commentary on my Irascible Professor website today entitled
> > "Not So Intelligent Design."  The URL is
> >
> > http://irascibleprofessor.com/comments-09-29-05.htm
cut