> While trying to locate someone, I found the following web site. It purports to list accredited scientists who are doubtful about Darwinism. It also claims a willingness to make corrections. Several of the standard misrepresentations are counted, however. Does anyone have the background and the time to send corrections?
I just glanced over the quotations from physicists. There is a wide variety & most of them are not really supportive of the sort of anti-Darwinisn or design arguments that are being promoted by the site. Yes, Paul Davies - quoted several times - thinks that there's a divine mind behind the universe, but he (like
Barrow & Tipler &c) argue for design at the cosmological level, not that of DNA. Hugh Ross is a competent astronomer, but failing to note that he's a full-time Christian apologist seems a bit disingenuous. & when Einstein said "The more I study science, the more I believe in God," the God he was referring to was identical
with the universe.
Whether or not these are "misrepresentations" is a matter of definition. They will not mislead those who read them carefully & are reasonably familiar with science-religion discussions, but they may unduly impress the naive.
George L. Murphy
"The Science-Theology Interface"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 02 2002 - 17:17:03 EST