Re: [asa] Jerry Coyne's Confused Attack on Religion (human evolution?)

From: Schwarzwald <>
Date: Thu Jan 29 2009 - 20:15:50 EST

What would 'holding back scientific advancement' be in that case? Defending
people who may not want to have their genes altered 'for the good of
society'? Defending people who don't engage in such, declaring them to be
equal persons, not inferior creatures? Urging reflection and contemplation?

Right now we have people who suggest that christians and other religious
believers 'hold back scientific advancement' by their very existence or
beliefs. For myself, I think the 'end-game' has less to do with genes and
more to do with mind. But I'm not about to pre-emptively demonize people who
disagree. (I live in Northeast PA where amish abound. Utter luddites in many
ways. Admirable in many ways too.)

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Dehler, Bernie <>wrote:

> George said:
> "I am no expert on the biology but on general principles we can say that
> the "movie" of evolution would be completely different if it were run again
> (a la Gould's "Wonderful Life" analogy) since we in fact only get to watch
> one showing of it."
> We are assuming humans are the "end-game." What if biological evolution
> isn't done yet- what if we are like monkeys compared to the next creature
> which may (or is) emerging? And what about humans creating their own
> evolution with modern science- directing the human genome by writing into it
> once it is more fully understood?
> Once scientists can write DNA, will Christians be the first in line trying
> to hold back scientific advancement because we are "made in God's image?"
> ...Bernie
> To unsubscribe, send a message to with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jan 29 20:16:14 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 29 2009 - 20:16:14 EST