Re: Is evolution really the central theory for all of biology?

From: Michael Roberts <>
Date: Thu Sep 15 2005 - 15:25:05 EDT

No, David, when you understand what rhetorical methods these evolutionists use, you can then know with certainty what they meant, even when it is contrary to what most would understand by those words. Because most ASAer ( in CISers ) are thickies and have no training in rhetoric they cant see what should be obvious.

I hope I have made myself clear.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: D. F. Siemens, Jr.
  Cc: ; ;
  Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 7:35 PM
  Subject: Re: Is evolution really the central theory for all of biology?

  You apparently haven't realized that Hunter is using strong Humpty Dumpty semantics. HD's own view was that, when he used a word, it meant exactly what he intended it to mean. But here the stronger version requires that the encounter of a word means what the reader/hearer wants it to mean. Therefore whatever Dobshansky intended, his definite Christian faith, don't matter. Hunter reads it as a denial of the very possibility of faith. You are attempting to rationally analyze the situation. I do not know how you can.

  On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 08:24:28 -0400 "Robert Schneider" <> writes:
    And just exactly what is your point? You haven't made it clear what you mean when you say that Dobzhansky's statement "entails theological claims." Surely, you're not saying that if one accepts evolution one must also hold a theology of creation, are you? Dobzhansky says that the two "are not mutually exclusive," and that he can be "both a creationist and and evolutionist." What do you think he means?

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Cornelius Hunter
      To: Robert Schneider ; Terry M. Gray ;
      Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 9:37 PM
      Subject: Re: Is evolution really the central theory for all of biology?

      Exactly my point guys. --Cornelius

      Don Nield <> wrote:
        Dobzhansky writes " It is wrong to hold creation and evolution as
        mutually exclusive alternatives. I am a creationist *and* an
        evolutionist." Later he writes "I submit that all these remarkable
        findings make sense in the light of evolution: they are nonsense
        otherwise." He also writes "Seen in the light of evolution, biology is,
        perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science.
        Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts some of them
        interesting or curious but making no meaninglful picture as a whole". He
        also writes "Does the evolutionary doctrine clash with religious faith ?
        It does not", and he goes on to explain that statement.
        Dobzhansky presents evidence that falsifies YEC but it does not falsify

        Robert Schneider <> wrote:
         They reflect Dobzhansky's own Christian theology of creation, shared by many ...

        Bob Schneider
Received on Thu Sep 15 16:22:00 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Sep 15 2005 - 16:22:00 EDT