Re: Darkness spreads over Kansas

Susan B (
Sat, 14 Aug 1999 20:58:17 -0500 (CDT)

At 11:20 PM 8/13/99 EDT, you wrote:
>>>Nothing disgusts me more than evolutionists who call anyone who disagrees
>>>with them "liars", which the term "falsehood" implies.
>Susan wrote:
>>I too have caught creationists in out and out lies. What does one do in that
>>I *does* happen. So what do you do? What would YOU do if you caught an
>>evolutionist telling an out and out lie? Keep silent? If so, why?

>Why not keep silent?

because if you keep silent it makes you complicit in the lie. It makes *you*
a liar also. It's not for me, thanks for the suggestion.

>In the first place, I don't believe Henry Morris, or
>anyone else involved in these debates "lies".

Henry Morris (I *think* it was him) was the dean of engineering at the
University of Oklahoma. I don't believe that he innocently misunderstands
the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, sorry.

>I don't believe Dawkins, with
>whom I completely disagree, "lies".

I don't care much for Dawkins either. He takes the facts of evolution and
tries to make them say more than they can ever say about theology and the
"whys" of life which are the exclusive domain of religion. I don't think
*he* lies about anything, but I do believe he's quite mistaken in his

>When I disagree with them, I believe
>they are mistaken. Having been mistaken myself at times in the past, I know
>it happens.

Gregg thought Behe was mistaken. I would have thought the same thing.
Science is a huge subject, every scientist can't know it all. Gregg provided
information to Behe that would have corrected the mistake. Behe indicated
that he already had the information. Therefore what he said was not a
mistake (because he had the information already) but a misrepresentation of
the truth--a lie, in other words.

>(I am confident I will also be mistaken at times in the future.)
> I state my opinions, especially when it is a minority view, merely to give
>support to others to share my unpopular beliefs. All views on evolution
>seem to be defended with a religious zealotry these days,

I would agree, but the Piltdown man was exposed by evolutionists--not
creationists. Heckel's bad drawings were called into question by
evolutionists. The research on peppered moths was questioned by
evolutionists. Evolution, like all branches of science, is under constant
examination and modification. Religions don't do that as a matter of course.

>However, I have found the creationists to be more tolerant of civil

ROFL!! sorry to laugh at this, but only one outrageously rude and uncivil
person has appeared on this list since I joined (Paracelcus) and he was a
creationist. No one has called you names or attacked you personally.
Although people (including me) have taken exception to your ideas and tryed
to prove you wrong, no one that I know of has been especially uncivil.

Peace is not the absence of conflict--it is the presence of justice.
--Martin Luther King, Jr.
Please visit my website: