mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (02/25/84)
=====================
... The systematic exclusion of creationists at AAAS meetings -
or at least the severe limitations of their discussions - is well known
(thank you, Dr. Awbrey).
The Ice Floe of the Q-Bick
=====================
Perhaps it is well-known to some people, but not to those of us who have
attended creationist ramblings at AAAS meetings.
--
Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmtrsc@entropy.UUCP (Rajiva Chakravarti) (02/27/84)
Sorry about my last attempt. What about the legality of presenting only creation and evolution (and no other religious theory)?
lab@qubix.UUCP (Q-Bick) (03/01/84)
uicsl!rmooney stated that > ...One must trust the scientific community to evaluate claims within > their area of expertise. I am confident that if any of the arguements > raised by creationists have any merit, they will eventually be > recognized and accepted by the majority of scientists within the > appropriate field; however, as yet this has not been the case. I > encourage persons who believe there is scientific evidence that the > current view of "origins" is inadequate to attempt to convince > sicnetists in the appropriate fields of their claims, such challenges > are an important part of science. So far, so called "scientific > creationists" have not been very successful in this endeavor. Alas, if only scientists did not also possess philosophical biases. Creationists HAVE tried to get their point across, but have run into the majority's philosophical stone wall. Scientific journals have full freedom in choosing what to print, and they do exercise it in various ways. Ditto for book publishers: publishing a book supporting scientific creation would be met with a boycott of that publisher by evolutionists - not necessarily in purchases, but worse, in the submission of manuscripts. The systematic exclusion of creationists at AAAS meetings - or at least the severe limitations of their discussions - is well known (thank you, Dr. Awbrey). Sometimes, some different pressure has to be applied - like Wendell Bird's excellent treatise on the legalities of presenting only evolution vs. presenting both evolution and creation in the public classroom. Yale is not exactly a place that would support Mr. Bird's conclusion, but seeing as he was one of their top law students (if not THE top), was editor of the Yale Law Journal, and did his treatise as a major part of his graduate work, it seemed wise to include it in the YLJ. -- The Ice Floe of the Q-Bick {ucbvax,ihnp4}!{decwrl,amd70}!qubix!lab decwrl!qubix!lab@Berkeley.ARPA