From: Walter Hicks (email@example.com)
Date: Sun Sep 21 2003 - 22:53:40 EDT
Let me be clear, Sarah.
I mention my daughter specifically to personalize it. I really do resent
generalizations like Glenn's. To demonize YECs is to lower yourself to the level
they are portrayed to represent.
I am not referring to my daughter when I mention people who basically believe in
a Young Earth outlook. They seem to represent most (but not all) of the
parishioners in my church -- and they do NOT have the hostile attitude that most
on this list portray as the norm for a belief in a literal Bible. They were
simply raised on the Bible and take those words at face value. Popular
literature portrays science as opposed to Christianity, so what can you expect?
Expect YECs to embrace evolution when the Prophet is Dawkins? Even with that, my
views are respected.
My church has a web site that lists various "resources". I have been working for
some time to get ASA listed and it is nearly a "done deal". My hope is that they
will see intelligent discussion that makes them feel like they are respected as
Christians -- and not a lot of criticism that makes them feel that they are
looked upon as bunch of illiterate fools. The material on the ASA site is
It is the discussions on this list that belittle people. My hope is (should the
site be listed) that nobody hears what I have been hearing. In fact, if I "had
my druthers', Terry would can any posts of this nature. I would love to see only
intelligent and POLITE discussion, rather that what has been posted lately.
The Christian message is for all folk. If they happen to accept what some call a
"mother goose" outlook and still know the Lord, then that it is acceptable in my
eyes -- as long as they are more tolerant of scientists than scientists here
are tolerant of them.
When ASA members learn to present the truth of science in a fashion that conveys
the points without being abusive and in a manner that can be readily understood,
then progress might be made. What I see on this list does meet the mail. IMO
Maybe I was wrong. Perhaps ASA is for scientists only and I erred in asking
that it be listed on the Church's web site. If anyone thinks so, let me know and
I can reverse the process.
Sarah Berel-Harrop wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Walter Hicks" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: "Glenn Morton" <email@example.com>
> Cc: "Josh Bembenek" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>
> Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 8:10 PM
> Subject: Questions to Allen Roy
> > Allen:
> > Glenn Morton wrote:
> > snip
> > >
> > > Having spent 20+ years as a YEC, I can assure you that I have a pretty
> > > understanding of their position. I published 30 items arguing for YEC.
> > > I said above is fair because they take a single interpretation of
> > > and assume that it is GOD's interpretation and expect everyone then to
> > > accept it. When you add the 'us vs. them' attitude they engender, you
> get a
> > > world view in which they believe they are the standard of truth and in
> > > anyone who disagrees with their standard is a 'son of satan' (a term I
> > > been called by them).
> > To me this is like condemning all italians after being mugged in an alley
> by one
> > some time in the past.
> > Several questions to Allen Roy:
> > Is this really the way that _YOU_ feel?
> > Do you think that Glenn's assessment is correct -- or does he just know a
> > narrow subspace of YECs?
> Well one thing to note,
> Glenn states here he was publishing pro-YEC
> scientific work. As such, he must have had a
> higher profile among professional YEC's - by
> this I mean people like AIG & ICR as opposed
> to people like your daughter. OF COURSE
> they are going to turn on him when he rejects
> these views. He was an active proponent of
> the views in question. They knew who he
> was and they needed to make him appear
> to be uncredible in order to maintain their
> own credibility in the eyes of people who
> respected Glenn's views. Correct me if
> I got the politics wrong here Glenn.
> Is that a narrow subspace? Well, probably. Is
> it significant that professionals whose life's work
> is to spread YEC acted like that? I think so.
> As we say in auditing, the tone is set at the top.
> Does it have anything to do with people like
> your daughter and does it reflect upon her?
> Probably not, but it's similar to the point that
> Aulie makes about ID in his review of Pandas
> and People. It is the existence of this silent
> majority of people who don't really know
> the facts but support a position that when
> investigated turns out to be dishonest at
> worst and negligently careless at best that permit
> this sort of nonsense to keep going. Do they
> have an affirmative duty to check this stuff out?
> I would say generally no ... if they are going
> to sit on school boards and start evaluating
> textbooks I would set the bar higher - a lot
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.516 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 09/01/2003
-- =================================== Walt Hicks <firstname.lastname@example.org>
In any consistent theory, there must exist true but not provable statements. (Godel's Theorem)
You can only find the truth with logic If you have already found the truth without it. (G.K. Chesterton) ===================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Sep 21 2003 - 22:53:12 EDT