Re: >Re: intell. des. and Berra's folly

E G M (
Thu, 4 Jun 1998 07:09:55 -0700 (PDT)

This is it Glenn.

Your ultimate defense is to accuse me of not being serious. This is a
sad tactic of yours of which I have been the target several times.
When I finally bring the matter clearly to the table, after having
tried carefully to answer your objections, you then simply quit by
accusing me of this or that. Moreover, I'm again "labeled" a
non-evolutionists -- I guess this is also part of the stratagema to
brush me aside. Don't worry Glenn, I learned my lesson, I won't
exchange with you anymore, and I'm being serious.


"Glenn R. Morton" <> wrote:
> At 09:07 AM 6/3/98 -0700, E G M wrote:
> >Yes, of course, the mouse trap is a macro system used by Behe as an
> >*example* of a I.C. system that could not have come together
> >darwinistically. In that case you are right and I am wrong but let
> >emphasize that the trap was used as an *example* and that the trap is
> >not a biological entity either.
> >
> >I guess what you want to find is a biological I.C. system that did
> >indeed evolved darwinistically in order to refute Behe's argument.
> this is not really a serious request because it is like Catch-22.
You are
> unlikely to agree that anything is evolved. And then use that to
claim that
> there is nothing to refute Behe. Heads you win, tails I lose. Godd
> tactics---bad science and logic.
> glenn
> Adam, Apes and Anthropology
> Foundation, Fall and Flood
> & lots of creation/evolution information

Get your free address at