Re: [NEWS] Press Release: Dembski attacks Pennock and MIT Press

From: Howard J. Van Till (
Date: Wed Jan 09 2002 - 13:43:31 EST

  • Next message: Glenn Morton: "Re: [NEWS] Press Release: Dembski attacks Pennock and MIT Press"

    > From: John W Burgeson <>
    > Let me be more direct then. At the NTSE I had several very civil
    > conversations with Schafersman which were directly to these sentiments. I
    > wrote of these conversations briefly in my article on the NTSE which
    > appeared in the ARN magazine some months later (a copy appears on my web
    > site). To the best of my knowledge, Schafersman echoed these sentiments,
    > both in private conversations and in his talk. He may not have been as
    > abrasive as what Bill reports (although I've seen stuff from Dawkins which
    > might qualify). In conversation, he expressed real bewilderment that the
    > TEs could cling to a religion which had so little (he may have said "none")
    > evidence for it except wishful thinking. He said he would probably not
    > choose to hire, or even work with, a scientist if he were a theist, anymore
    > than he would hire a plumber who approached his job looking for
    > supernatural causes to why the toilet was stopped up. He genuinely could
    > not understand how a person could be, at one time, a theist and a
    > scientist. He echoed these sentiments in other, group, conversations. I did
    > not hear him use pejorative language, but I would have to call it somewhat
    > patronizing language.
    > Schafersman is a gentleman and it was enjoyable to dialog with him. We
    > subsequently exchanged a few emails, as my article developed (since I
    > referenced him, I wanted to let him see the draft), but I've lost ouch in
    > the past few years since he moved on from Miami (Ohio) University.
    > The net of this -- while I would not probably use Bill's words for his
    > claim, the claim is factually true, at least in the case I have described.


    I have no reason to doubt your account. And if Schafersman's words were in
    print you would have every right to quote them in print as his personal
    sentiments. Would you, however, feel justified in rewording them into an
    abrasive style and then ascribing them to "the Darwinian establishment"?


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 09 2002 - 13:56:14 EST