Re: paleonet Re: suitable discussion

[Peter Paul Smolka <smolka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Frank Holterhoff wrote:

> Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 15:33:16 -0500
> From: Frank Holterhoff <frank@matricus.com>
> Reply-To: paleonet@nhm.ac.uk
> To: paleonet@nhm.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: paleonet Re: suitable discussion
>
> Help, I'm having an identity crisis!  Am I really one of the Bad Guys?
>
( ... )

> can't see where there's an attack on Science.
>
> So, I guess I've made everybody read through my life story just to ask
> the question:  Do I not understand the term Intelligent Design
> correctly?  Or am I one of the Bad Guys after all?

Dear Frank,

I would say:

As long as the Geology is done well, the ID question is as relevant
or not as the number of the bus you take / color of the car you
drive (see the Chicxulub example).

There are however other people, independent of the contents of this
list, who have the opinion, that everything _must_ be explained
(even if later hints for an other side, may or may not, e.g. a
hypothesis to test open minded, if there might be tests) without
such a concept, e.g. even the thought of god is a small step into
doom.

I personally regard this as a question that is open to ongoing and
future scientific progress, in the sense of being open minded
and _testing_ (not fighting for or against). Considering the
scientific progress of the last 400 years, partricularly the last 100,
we can look forward excited to the next 400.

As this list, as far as I understood, deals with geology, I think
as long geological results are not affected (ID) other opinions
can be viewed neutral.

As soon as results are affected (6000 years) I think, we should
be against this, as (as I understood Lisa Park) in the long range
even proposals might be rejected, tried to be expslained with the
Chicxulub/Yaxcopil example
and pragmatic attempts to build golden bridges for the bible people
(previous replies).

So: Whether you are among the good or among the bad guys:

I would say: As long as the geology is good, you can be were you like.
(as I am not aware of the "tone" of above in US esar: I mean above
friendly and politely, in the sense: no need to be concerned).


> F
>
> Dr. Lisa E. Park wrote:
>
> > Dolf's own closing remarks mentioned ID and how we must continue
> > discussing and challenging this attack on science.
>

Best regards

Peter

**********************************************************************
Dr. Peter P. Smolka
University Muenster
Geological Institute
Corrensstr. 24
D-48149 Muenster

Tel.: +49/251/833-3989   +49/2533/4401
Fax:  +49/251/833-3989   +49/2533/4401
E-Mail: smolka@uni-muenster.de
E-Mail: PSmolka@T-Online.de
**********************************************************************