From: madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann)
Subject: Re: THE MIND OF THE BIBLE BELIEVER
Organization: Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 05:21:28 GMT

mlee@post.RoyalRoads.ca (Malcolm Lee) writes: >
maddi: >|>

>I apologize for not responding sooner.  My node's been down for a while.

Well, welcome back!

>|> }>As for Creationism, you can't disprove it.  
>|> 
>|>   [ Some material deleted for brevity ]

Shouldn't have deleted here.  This is where I explained that
you can't prove anything in Science, you can only disprove.
And Creationism has been disproved.

Would you please state the Theory of Creationism for us?
I really mean this, by the way, since no one else has been
able to state it.  And no, I am not asking for the Genesis
account; I'm asking for the Theory. 

Let's agree to disagree on how the world was created, but
I have serious issues with this being taught in SCIENCE
CLASS!  I have no objection to it being taught in Relgion
class.  Can you see the difference?

>A software virus does not evolve, it propagates.  A software virus may
>mutate itself to take into account the current configuration of the
>system that it is trying to infect but it is still basically the same
>virus.  I can still use the same anti-viral program to clean it out no
>matter which mutation it takes on.  There is no way that it will change
>to a completely new species of computer virus as your theory of evolution
>would imply.  A Michaelangelo virus will not change itself to the Stoned
>virus no matter how many permutations you go through.  Computer viruses
>do not evolve and neither do living species.  We can agree to disagree on
>this point.

By the way, this above paragraph has a number of incorrect statements
in it, including the fact that viruses do mutate to a form that the
antiviral programs cannot find them, and thus must be rewritten.
Same analogy as with biological viruses, where they mutate and
the new virus spreads like crazy because no one's ever dealt with
it before.

>|> }>Evolution is only a theory.  
>|> }
>|> }Turn off the tape recorder and think, Malcolm.  Do you know what
>|> }a theory is?  Can you give me a definition?  Can you define the
>|> }Scientific Method?
>|> }
>|> }I don't think you know diddly-squat about science, because I bet
>|> }you can't answer any of these questions.
>|> }
>Aren't we getting a tad personal here?  I'm not asking you to agree
>with what I believe in but I do ask for common courtesy.  We do disagree
>on many points and it is not likely that either one of us is going to 
>change our beliefs.  At the very least, we can still be civil.

I apologize if the tone sounded harsh, but I *was* frustrated.
Unfortunately, you didn't respond to my comments about how I
felt you were reciting the party line rather than examining this
issue for yourself.  "Evolution is only a theory" is a comment
I've heard from many fundamentalist Christians.  Problem is,
it's incorrect, for reasons I explained earlier.

>I probably am infuriating you, Maddi.  I don't intend to be so annoying
>but there's nothing that you've said that will disuade my belief in God.
>And, no, I cannot prove that He exists but neither can you disprove that
>He exists.  All I know is that He is real to me and He has played a very
>active role in my life.

Believe it or not, I am not trying to dissuade you from believing
in God.  My objection is to some dangerous features of Christianity.
I've discussed those earlier, namely evangelizing, and turning off
one's mind.  Such as the example above about "Evolution is only a
theory."

>I will admit that you are a better scientist than I am.  The Evolution-
>Creationism debate is not one of my interests.  I have limited knowledge
>regarding both subjects and am not interested in biology.  I'm a Comp Sci
>geek, remember.

And I have an economics degree, worked as a systems analyst, and am
now a technical writer.  Nothing stopped me from learning about other
subjects, and nothing is stopping you.  Go for it!

>|> }>I don't agree with banning
>|> }>any science curricula.  I think that children should be allowed to make
>|> }>their own decisions.  And I am a Christian too.
>|> }
>|> }Well, the problem is that you're mixing science and religion.
>|> }How would you like it if your kids were taught the Norse Creation
>|> }Theory in science class.  The Vedic Creation Theory?  You see the
>|> }can of worms you're opening?
>
>I'm open to that.  Since when has an open mind been a can of worms? 

Seriously, do you want other religion's creation myths taught in
science class?  Not religion, science class.  Forgive me if I 
sound a little incredulous but I do not believe you.

Now, why haven't you responded to my query on your religious
background?  You have been *VERY* evasive on this issue.  Is
there a reason for this?


-- 
Maddi Hausmann                       |  The Truth is still The Truth, forsooth 
madhaus@netcom.com                   |  Even if believing It you refuse
Centigram Communications Corp        |  Disproof's uncouth, refuting moot
San Jose California  408/428-3553    |  A Fundie's brain is dead.

Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc