Re: Kansas and NBC

Moorad Alexanian (
Fri, 13 Aug 1999 10:58:47 -0400

I do not know the reasons behind the proposal. My point was the teaching of
good science that is not too controversial and that does not rise the ire of
the parents of the students who are being taught. Much good science can be
taught without creating such a turmoil. The big bang theory should not have
been dragged in the ensuing arguments over evolution but it did. It is true
that the big bang is an assumption that fits some data correctly but that is
all. It may not be the ultimate explanation and theory. Physics with regard
to the unification of forces is much firmer than anything like it in
biology. Remember theories can be tested in physics by means of experiments,
I am not sure of it in evolutionary biology. Let us not forget the forensic
nature of historical biology. Only in cosmology do we have something
analogous to it in physics. The rest of physics relies heavily on
experiments that can be done in the present.


-----Original Message-----
From: Blaine D. McArthur <>
To: <>
Date: Friday, August 13, 1999 10:21 AM
Subject: Re: Kansas and NBC

>Hello Moorad,
>Two points.
>1. A lot of people, a lot of intelligent people, a lot of intelligent
>Christians "do see it." I am only half kidding when I say this decision
>scares me - I see Torquemada (?) just around the corner. This decision
>serves only to stifle the search for the truth about God's creation.
>This decision really bothers me, not as much for what they did, but for
>why. The scandal of the evangelical has just grown deeper.
>2. Is physics really on that much firmer a foundation than biology
>is? There seems to me to be just as much controversy in cosmology and
>astronomy as there is in biology. Yeah, they thow a lot more numbers
>around than the biologists do; but they squabble and disagree about the
>results just as much as the biologists do. I am sure that there is
>someone on this list who, if they cared to, could play the devil's
>advocate, and do the same kind of hatchet job on physics as P.J. did on
>> . It is fine to emulate physics with the notion of "unification"
>> but I do not see it in biology. Moorad