I work with some pretty intelligent people: one of them saw Dennett's book
_Darwin's Dangerous Idea_ and boldly stated to me that creationism and evolution
were not in conflict. Of course, I disagree and told him so, suggesting he give
me a single instance where they are not in conflict. He did not even try, his
answer was "You are not being reasnable". Humm - well, what do you say to that?
There is not a verse regarding reality in "genesis" that does not conlict whith
science.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" - We know the age of the
Earth to be much less than the most of the Universe, they were not created at
the same time, even the opening line is wrong.
I do think that fear is what keeps them from disbelief - this is the only
generalization I knowingly will go with.
Sodom
Bill Roh
Tim Rhodes wrote:
> Nathaniel Hall wrote:
>
> >Tim Rhodes wrote:
> >> Attributing the actions of your opponent to a moral weakness on their
> >>part
> >> is one of the best ways to ensure your own future defeat at their hands.
> >
> > Therefore by standing up for what you think is right you are doing the
> >wrong thing!
>
> My what a large non sequitur you have there.
>
> Maybe you miss the point. By painting one you oppose as less than you--more
> fearful or stupid or lazy--you deny that they may be motivated by the same
> drives as you, deny that they may be as complex and caring as yourself. And
> an advisary which you don't fully understand or respect--or even worse, one
> whose capacities you under estimate--is an advisary you invite to hand you
> your defeat on a platter gilded with your own foolishness.
>
> -Prof. Tim