Re: [asa] historical versus experimental sciences

From: Randy Isaac <>
Date: Sun Aug 09 2009 - 21:15:07 EDT

Yes, Ted, Steve does explicitly endorse the reliability of historical
sciences in his book. He points out that this is the method by which it can
be shown that there was action by an intelligent agent in the past. For that
reason it is essential that historical sciences are considered to be
accurate and trustworthy.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Davis" <>
To: <>
Cc: <>; <>
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: [asa] historical versus experimental sciences

> From what I've heard from someone who is reading Steve Meyer's new book,
> he has a strongly positive view of the historical sciences. If anyone
> reading this has a copy -- the Messiah library copy is in still in
> process -- I would love to hear some specifics about this. The more I
> read Cameron's posts and interact with some other ID advocates, the more I
> think that there are two schools of thought on this, within the ID "camp."
> On the one hand, there are those who think that the appropriate attitude
> to hold toward historical sciences is deep scepticism, giving them a much
> lower status that other sciences; on the other hand, there seem to be
> those who have a lot of confidence in the historical sciences. Cameron
> seems to be leaning toward the former.
> As I say, this is a conclusion that I am presently forming, and if I'm not
> drawing the appropriate conclusion I am more than open to correction.
> Ted
> 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 Sun Aug 9 21:15:40 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Aug 09 2009 - 21:15:40 EDT