Re: Public perceptions of science: was Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

From: George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
Date: Fri Sep 09 2005 - 08:16:43 EDT

I agree with what's been said here so far &, in particular, think it's
important to realize that the ID movement is part of a larger culture wars
agenda. But there are other factors involved in the assault on good
science. Some of this started in the 60s as part of the romanticism
associated with the counter-culture, & the notion of some post-modernists
that the scientific approach to understanding the physical world isn't any
more valid that any other way also plays into it.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Schneider" <rjschn39@bellsouth.net>
To: "Don Nield" <d.nield@auckland.ac.nz>; "Michael Roberts"
<michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 10:51 PM
Subject: Re: Public perceptions of science: was Why Most Published Research
Findings Are False

>I agree, Don, that evangelistic atheists like Dawkins & Co. shoulder some
>responsibility for contributing to the distrust of science. They speak to
>a largely educated audience, and Dawkins often does so in the kind of
>inflated rhetoric that makes for good copy to a press that thrives on
>conflict. But at the same time they add more ammunition to the stores of
>the professional advocates of YEC and ID who use their words to make a case
>against mainstream science by not making the distinction between science
>and scientism that you and I understand.
Received on Fri Sep 9 08:19:46 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Sep 09 2005 - 08:19:46 EDT