What my tiny little brain was thinking... [was Re: [asa] Two Amino Acid Difference in Gene May Explain Human Speech]

From: Murray Hogg <muzhogg@netspace.net.au>
Date: Thu Nov 12 2009 - 20:52:46 EST

Hi Schwarzwald,

No, I wasn't directing the remark at yourself - and I'm not sure I can flesh it out because it really is a declaration that I can no longer get my head around the various claims and counter claims being made.

I will say that it is unfortunate that my response to your post reads like a partisan remark, so mea culpa for THAT little misfire.

Other than that let me offer a personal opinion from which others may reasonably dissent; in my personal opinion there is neither a scientific nor a theological issue that requires resolution here - no credible person (ID theorists included) denies that evolution happened, all Christians believe that God was in some way or other involved, and no TE is AFAIK arguing that humans are just an incredible cosmic fluke.

So what, precisely, is the debate about? Frankly, I no longer see it. It makes no sense to me whatever.


Schwarzwald wrote:
> Murray,
> Now, hold on. I've had a lot of praise for TEs such as Denton and Conway
> Morris. When (in a recent thread) it was suggested that TEs uncritically
> accept "Darwinian evolution", I immediately pointed out how this is not
> true, and cited a battery of quotes from a Templeton Foundation Q&A to
> back that up. Dembski has said that Ken Miller's thoughts on God's
> involvement in the world (working at the quantum level) counts as an ID
> proposal, and even Ben Wiker (a pretty outspoken ID proponent) heaped
> praise on Conway Morris and Denton for their writings on evolution.
> I somehow suspect you weren't directing that comment at myself, but if
> you're willing, I'd like you to flesh out what you do mean. I will say
> that I myself have criticized the IDM, insofar as they seem to send out
> mixed signals about "evolution" (and a lot of that is due to confusion
> between "Darwinian evolution" which is loaded with bad metaphysics, and
> just plain "evolution" which is another question altogether.)
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Murray Hogg <muzhogg@netspace.net.au
> <mailto:muzhogg@netspace.net.au>> wrote:
> Schwarzwald wrote:
> Rich,
> ID is not committed to opposition to evolution. Dembski has said
> this, Behe has said this
> Theistic Evolutionists have said this...
> But, of course, Dembski and Behe are right, whereas TE's are wrong...
> It is, for my tiny little brain, all very confusing...
> Blessings,
> Murray
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu
> <mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Nov 12 20:53:06 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Nov 12 2009 - 20:53:07 EST