At 10:26 AM 11/8/98 -0800, Bonnie Stout wrote:

> The study of origins is AT BEST a POST HOC
>application of hypotheses to a LIMITED DATA SET!

However, the study of evolution is more than the study of
origins, and gives rise to hypotheses which can (and have)
been tested.

So-called "scientific" creationists do not do this.

> In the end it will always
>boil down to WHAT YOU BELIEVE!

Can't disagree with this.

> The FACT that most scientists ACCEPT
>evolution as fact does not MAKE IT FACT.

Evolution is fact, as it has been observed in nature. HIV, for
instance, appears to be one organism which has recently evolved.

You're making a common mistake, here. Gravity is also a fact. Of
course, we also have a theories of gravity which attempt to explain
how it works. Likewise evolution.

> This distinction is lost on the
>masses and very often even on the scientists themselves. They BELIEVE it
>based on how they interpret the data (you see the problem here?).

Scientists, though, tend to at least be honest about the data. So-called
"scientific" creationists freely lie about data. It is not a simple
disagreement over interpretation of data, as you seem to suggest.

Do you believe that lying in the name of God is a Christian act?

>I am not trying to insult these scientists or belittle their
>efforts - but you can only do so much when you are trying to piece together
>the past. We have to realize the limitations of the work. We will never
>be able to PROVE anyone's theory on the origin of life.

Another common creationist mistake in regard to evolution: the theory
of evolution says NOTHING about the origin of life. The theory of
evolution by definition acts on living creatures, well, at least
self-replicating entities (is HIV alive? another question altogether).
In other words, after the beginning of life, not before.

> You can only
>examine the available evidence - What do you BELIEVE? (please don't answer,
>it is a rhetorical question!)

Well, I *KNOW* that so-called "scientific" creationists refuse to examine
the available evidence. They cherry-pick and then mostly lie about that
evidence they choose to talk about. They have never given us a testable
theory of creation. It's not science.

What do I BELIEVE? Well...I believe that lying in the name of
God is hypocritical and un-Christian.

Don't you?



- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza at pacifier.com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net