jonw@azure.UUCP (Jonathan White) (03/28/84)
Since my name came up in Larry's latest wide-ranging counterattack, I will respond in kind. Larry claims that: Christians aren't "bending" science to fit their particular views. They are seeing if a consistent scientific model explains the evidence better than the predominant model, which has much philosophical support. Although there are those much more qualified than myself to respond to this, I will mention that your "philosophical support" (the Bible, no doubt) is your only real evidence. In order to believe in creationism, you must reject an enormous body of scientific evidence that has accumulated in the fields of biology, geology, astronomy, paleontology, anthropology, etc. The overwhelming weight of the evidence all points to an old universe and an old earth. (Yes, I realize that there are a few anomalies that don't fit into the otherwise consistent pattern, but they are so minor in comparison that they are hardly good evidence for a special creation 6,000 years ago.) It is true that a simple-minded supernatural explanation can easily explain just about any phenomenon, but science simply can't function in an atmosphere of superstition. Because supernatural explanations, by their very nature, can never really be disproven, they have no place in science. BTW, since evolution isn't falsifiable, I guess Jon says it's not science. Nice try, Larry. Evolution IS falsifiable. If you can prove that the earth is quite a bit younger than several billion years, you have just proved evolution false. There is a wealth of data out there for you to examine, but unfortunately for your position, almost all of it tends to prove that the earth is old and that life evolved from the simple to the complex. Get back to me in a few years and let me know what you find. Jon White [decvax|ucbvax]!tektronix!tekmdp!azure!jonw