Re: [asa] science martyrs

From: George Murphy <GMURPHY10@neo.rr.com>
Date: Mon Mar 02 2009 - 09:19:19 EST

Whatever problems there may be with TE aren't due to any supposed nebulosity
of data. Any form of TE (yes, consider all the problems with the term read)
is a theological interpretation of the scientific understanding of
biological evolution. It is not a scientific theory that stands alongside,
or against, other scientific theories of evolution. & there's nothing
nebulous about the observational evidence & theoretical support for
evolution. If some form of TE is vague & nebulous its because whoever has
developed or it hasn't understood the science, hasn't done the theology
well, or both.

Shalom
George
http://home.roadrunner.com/~scitheologyglm

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Walley" <john_walley@yahoo.com>
To: "Alexanian, Moorad" <alexanian@uncw.edu>
Cc: "AmericanScientificAffiliation" <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 8:44 AM
Subject: RE: [asa] science martyrs

>
>
> Obviously this is a rhetorical question and it confirms my point that
> Collines can keep his scientific credentials and respect while Behe can't
> because Collins doesn't adopt a position that is stronger than the
> evidence will support which Behe does to his detriment.
>
> People find fault with TE because it is too vague and nebulous but that is
> what the data is as well.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Mar 2 09:20:56 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Mar 02 2009 - 09:20:56 EST