Re: Guilt by association

From: Iain Strachan (
Date: Sat May 10 2003 - 16:58:21 EDT

  • Next message: Michael Roberts: "Fw: [RTB Discussion Group] Wimps, Gimps and Blackguards:"

    James Mahaffy:

    > Roberts wrote:
    > >
    > > IDers are ambivalent on the age of the earth and many like
    > > Johnson,Pearcy try to say that it is
    > > not an important issue. By doing that they in fact swing the argument in
    > > favour of YEC. After all
    > > if all life is approx only 10,000years old then evolution by any means
    > > (bar the miraculouis ) is
    > Folks,
    > As someone who is not ID but respects some of the IDer a bit more, let
    > me differ with good vicar. I do NOT like adhominens and I do not like
    > guilt by association. Both Behe and Johnson (but not some of the others
    > in the ID camp) are not YEC but are old earthers. Behe in fact sees no
    > problems with most of life originating by evolution.

    I couldn't agree more. It was perfectly clear to me on reading Behe's book
    that he supports descent from a common ancestor, and that he believes the
    earth is billions of years old. All the people in the ID camp I've
    corresponded with whom I've asked are also in the Old Earth camp.

    To say that you're going to ignore perfectly sound mathematical arguments
    just because some ID'ers are YEC doesn't make any sense at all.

    Michael, what were you thinking of? Are you to say that Newton's laws of
    motion aren't worth considering because Newton was a crazy alchemist who
    believed you could turn lesser elements into gold? Or that Faraday's laws
    should be ignored because Faraday was a Young Earther (I think I read that

    Completely baffled,

    --- I.G.D. Strachan

    'Tis the majority in this, as all, prevail.
    Assent, and you are sane -
    Demur - you're straightway dangerous
    And handled with a chain -
    (Emily Dickinson).

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 10 2003 - 16:58:20 EDT