RE: [asa] Behe's Math... was Arrogance

From: Peter Loose <peterwloose@compuserve.com>
Date: Fri Aug 31 2007 - 02:41:28 EDT

 
 
 
Who says that 'science' is neutral wrt to Theism?
 
Combined in one 'story', that of the Peppered Moth, reported in London and
writ large for all to see, is the poverty of evidential support for
neo-Darwinism and its evangelising anti-God zeal:
 
 "The August 25 story in The Independent quotes Majerus as saying: "The
peppered moth story is easy to understand, because it involves things that
we are familiar with: Vision and predation and birds and moths and pollution
and camouflage and lunch and death. That is why the anti-evolution lobby
attacks the peppered moth story. They are frightened that too many people
will be able to understand."24

On this list I saw some glowing over this Majerus story and taking Dr
Jonathan Wells to task for his stance re Kettlewell and the Peppered Moth.
In a 2,500 word plus paper just posted, Dr Jonathan Wells has demonstrated
his characteristic analytical style as he unpacks the story. That may just
inspire a few humble apologies to be given?
 
Here are two brief extracts from the paper -
 
"So crucial evidence for Darwin's theory - the origin of species by means of
natural selection - is missing. And peppered moths don't provide it.
 
Even if the classic peppered moth story were 100% true, it would demonstrate
only a reversible shift in the proportions of two varieties in a
pre-existing species. It would tell us nothing about the origin of those
varieties, much less of Biston betularia, moths, insects, or animals in the
first place.
 
So the peppered myth is not only dead, but also irrelevant."
..
 
"Instead, it is the promoters of Darwinism who are frightened, because what
seemed to be the most "visual" evidence for their doctrine is gone. It is
not the "anti-evolution lobby" that is in a panic to attack the peppered
myth, but Darwinists who are in a panic to save it. Witness the giddy zeal
with which the perversely misnamed National Center for Science Education is
now praising Majerus's lecture.25 And witness Majerus's mind-numbing
conclusion: The "fact of Darwinian evolution" shows that humans invented God
and that there will be "no second coming; no helping hand from on high."26"

Read it in full here:
 
Exhuming the Peppered Mummy
By: Jonathan
<http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=41&isFell
ow=true> Wells
Discovery Institute
August 30, 2007
 
http://www.discovery.org/a/4198
 
 
Peter
 
 
  _____

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Gregory Arago
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 9:57 PM
To: Janice Matchett; George Murphy; Alexanian, Moorad
Cc: AmericanScientificAffiliation
Subject: Re: [asa] Behe's Math... was Arrogance
 
The point is taken, Janice, if I understand what you are pointing to, that
George Murphy, as well as many other TE's on this list, 'appear' to defend
theistic evolution almost as strongly as they defend their Christian faiths.

 
'As long as it carries an evolution label' is a type of ideological rhetoric
that I confronted a few months ago (perhaps several) at ASA with threads
asking for examples of 'things that don't evolve (into being or having
become).' The only answer given by the strong TEists was the Deity, G-D,
whereas weak TEists came up with additional answers. It was like pulling
teeth with Ted Davis to reach the minimal One thing that doesn't evolve
(into being or having become).
 
It really only takes a simple thought experiment to expel the notion of
'universalistic evolutionism' (who could defend this?) from the mind of any
person who accepts the provisionality of science; all scientific theories,
even the 'theory' of evolution, are someday to be eclipsed. What will TE's
do with their theology when the 'concept' they have anchored their theology
to has been over-written?
 
'Rubbish,' is what they will say, what they do say. But is it really so much
more rubbish than efforts to clarify effects of pattern recognition and
specificationalism (ism...ism, Dembskiism)? Theological evolutionism (and we
should note carefully the 'ism' here) is not that much different on a
practical level of science from atheologial evolutionism. Its theorists may
hide behind methodological (MN) imperative, but for learned observers this
TE tic/strategy/perspective is fooling no one.

Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:

"It would be great if all disagreements among Christians could be dealt with
as in-house matters. But when some Christians present arguments in the
public square which reflect badly on the Christian faith & make it a target
for legitimate criticism and even understandable ridicule, what are we to
do? To take an example much more egregious than Behe, are we to let Ken
Ham's creation museum be the public face of a Christian view of science?
Should we let unbelievers think that we're willing to tolerate every kind of
rubbish as long as it carries a Christian label?" ~ George Murphy 10:15 AM
8/30/2007

@ Or put another way:

"...when atheist evolutionists present arguments in the public square which
reflect badly on the TEs & make it a target for legitimate criticism and
even understandable ridicule, what are we to do? To take an example much
more egregious than evolutionist Richard Dawkins, are we to let Ken Ham's
creation museum be the public face of a Christian view of science? Should we
let unbelievers think that we're willing to tolerate every kind of rubbish
as long as it carries a evolution label?"

~ Janice ... http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/200705/0824.html

 
  
  _____

Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people.
<http://ca.answers.yahoo.com> Go to Yahoo! Answers.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.12/979 - Release Date: 29/08/2007
20:21

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Aug 31 02:42:17 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Aug 31 2007 - 02:42:20 EDT