From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Subject: Re: Logic and God (was: Young earth creationist logic NOT!)
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 19:15:55 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.164252.15984@acuson.com>, lawson@acuson.com (Drew Lawson) writes:
>>>A researcher comes to a fork in the road (figuratively speaking), and
>>>has to choose between A and B, and chooses A.  If he is asked why he
>>>made that choice and responds that his doctrinal learning has told him
>>>that B is a dead-end, he is likely to be laughed to scorn.  
>
>Consider dropping the religious vocabulary.  Joe Scientist, with 20
>years research experience says, "I have a hunch I should check out A."
>
>What is your reaction?

He's admitted that he simply had a hunch, had to make a decision as to which
avenue to pursue, and took the one that he felt was more likely.  Contrast
this to your religious person who claims that he already KNEW the answer
(hell, if he already KNEW the answer, what's the point of research in the first
place) before making the decision.

>>So look at it this way: If you, (Drew or any other firm believer in a
>>doctrinal religion) made a scientific prediction based on some element
>>of your religious faith, and that prediction proved *wrong*, would you
>>then recant your faith and adopt a different religion, or none at all?
>
>That would depend strongly on the nature of the situation.  If you have
>a scientific theory and find a counter example, do you recant science
>entirely?

Nope.  But on the other hand, I don't hear scientists going around claiming
that any particular theory is 100% accurate, explains everything, and is never
to be questioned again.  I hear LOTS of creationists making those claims about
the Bible, and lots of creationists (Drew, most recently) trying to claim that
that's the attitude of scientists.

>>>>  It's a real question, Sir:  why are your religious beliefs to be used
>>>>as a guide to science, and not theirs?
>>[Drew:]
>>>Let them worship as they please, but DO let them worship.
>>
>>Huh? I'm as much in favor of religious freedom as anyone, but this
>>seems a total non-sequitur to the question it seems intended to answer.
>
>The question asked was implying that I felt that _my_ religious views
>should be _enforced_ on others.  That is not my position.

Then you're now admitting that creationism doesn't have the slightest bearing
on science?  Then what the hell are you doing arguing for creationism in
sci.skeptic?  Or why aren't you arguing for all the rest of the myriad creation
myths.  No, it appears that once again you're lying to us, Drew.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic