Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: possibly OT: NYT article on GA creationism/evolution debate



The problem with creation stories is that they are not EVEN theories; i.e. they are untestable suppositions.

Dr. Mark H. Shapiro
http://irascibleprofessor.com


-----Original Message-----
From: William Beaty [mailto:billb@ESKIMO.COM]
Sent: Fri 8/23/2002 6:37 PM
To: PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu
Cc:
Subject: Re: possibly OT: NYT article on GA creationism/evolution debate



On Fri, 23 Aug 2002, John Clement wrote:

> Why should anyone object to labeling evolution as a theory, which indeed
> it is? And it should be approached with an open mind and studied
> carefully and critically.

This labeling was a Creationist ploy to make Evolution appear on shaky
ground. We can reason that if something is a theory, therefore it must be
"ONLY a theory," and therefore it has nothing to do with well-verified
knowledge. Their ploy is a logical fallacy, and we should object loudly.

It's admirable to question knowledge, but when an enemy starts using our
self-questioning as part of a distortion attempt, it's time to resist that
ploy. Instead turn the spotlight of critical questioning on that enemy.
For example, what do you call a supposed Christian who uses lies and
distortion to sway an audience? From what I've seen of some Creationist
articles, their authors seem to think that dishonesty is just fine if it's
part of a fight against unbelievers.


> Of course as a counter response the biblical creation story should be
> labeled as a creation myth, and it too should be studied carefully and
> critically.

Exactly. Another response: label such things as CHRISTIAN. One thing
that keeps getting swept under the table is the idea that The Goddess
created the universe, or the Hindu Pantheon did it, or even that Allah did
it. Newspaper articles miss this point, and they promote the creationist
cause by talking as if the word "religion" was synonymous with
"Christianity." Creationists very specifically are NOT arguing in support
of religion, instead they are arguing in support of Christianity. The
quoted article is wrong. They aren't trying to inject religious concepts
into school science, instead they are trying to inject CHRISTIAN concepts,
and this unfairly gives advantage to one particular religion.

Here's my own ploy. Regardless of what certain politicians seem to think,
Christianity is not the state religion of the USA, and if we're going to
start mentioning God (or actually Jehovah) in our biology textbooks, then
we absolutely MUST give equal time to Muslims, Pagans... and certainly to
the Church of Satan.


:)



(((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb@eskimo.com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA 206-789-0775 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci