Muggles for Harry Potter
jennifer.rowland at ic.ac.uk
Fri Jun 23 04:48:19 EDT 2000
>>> The creationists misrepresent their position, and try to make fools
>>> of other people.
>> If I inserted the word jew in the above sentence I would be called a
>> and slung me out of the discussion group.
>You would also be telling an untruth, where Jennifer is merely guilty of
>a sweeping generalisation. If Jennifer were to have said "Creationists
>I have encountered misrepresent...." there would have been nothing
>about her remark.
The question I was answering was "why not let creationists make fools of
themselves?", I think. But it's true that I was overgeneralising. I realised
after I sent the last email that I'd been saying "creationists" where I
meant "Creation Scientists", as they call themselves. People who believe
that a God or gods created the world are not the ones I'm pissed off with,
the fact that I don't agree with them is my problem, not theirs.
It is true that Creation Scientists whose work I have reluctantly read
misrepresent their position.
>It may be that creationists are distorting their research in order to
>recruit people to their particular cults, but... where's the evidence?
Again, I don't think scientists who believe in The Creation are bad
scientists, but that non-scientist-creationists distort science for their
own ends. Sorry I didn't make that clearer.
>My view - and it is only an oppinion - is that the creationists are
>evolutionary theory because it is better supported than their own, and
>with their world-view. This is bad science - they are trying to force
>world-view on people in the teeth of the evidence. But they would
>this than re-examine their own opinions.
To unsubscribe, email dwj-request at suberic.net with the body "unsubscribe".
Visit the archives at http://suberic.net/dwj/list/
More information about the Dwj