From: David.Rice@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Theistic Anti-Evolution
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Nov 17 1992
Date: 18 Dec 92  16:54:16

Re: Bogus TAE reasoning, and why I get caught every time
Who: robd@cherry09.cray.com (Robert Derrick)
What: <1992Dec14.162611.29731@hemlock.cray.com>
 
[Introduction cut to save space. Interested? See original. I've
reproduced the bulk of your article, as I think it deserves
repeating in case someone missed it.]
 
RD> "I guess I have a strong opinion about what these guys [TAEs]
RD> are trying to prove, and so I read freely between the lines.
RD> This may be unsafe, but I feel that if I were to mistate their
RD> position, they would be the first to correct me. Neither one
RD> ever did.
RD> 
RD> I think, if anything, they enjoy creating controversy. It is
RD> clear from TAE writings that they view dissent as contrary
RD> evidence, as, if Gould disagrees with Sagan, this somehow
RD> lends credence to Gish and Sada Puta and Velicrashghi or even
RD> Charles Fort.
RD>
RD> I believe that when a TAE talks about "time is not constant",
RD> they are doing so solely to, somehow, cram the history of the
RD> universe into 6,000 years, with the bulk of it jammed into the
RD> first seven days. Any discussion that otherwise transmutes their
RD> position is just adding to the fire of controversy.
RD>
RD> I believe that when a TAE talks about consciousness, they are
RD> doing so solely to, somehow, prove that the supernatural soul
RD> exists, and that life is by it's nature, non-mechanistic. All
RD> other discussion, that tries to imply that the TAE didn't
RD> actually say that, in a particular case, does in no way mollify
RD> the intent in that case.
RD> 
RD> In a sense, this does tend to stereotype TAE's, so that when one
RD> shows up that is a little more of a thinker than the usual crowd,
RD> they are trampled underfoot as if they were just more of the same
RD> rabble. And this is sad. But it is not tragic. If someone has
RD> a new idea, and a belief and yes, a faith, in that idea, and
RD> convictions, they will be able to withstand the buffets of
RD> criticism until more sober minds have allowed themselves to
RD> cogitate a little more on this new radical idea. Strangely enough,
RD> that is exactly how science works. Don't like it? Find yourself
RD> a congregation and tell them -- they'll believe anything! It may
RD> not be as satisfying, but it can be a whole lot more profitible.
RD> And after all, what's more important?
RD> 
RD> rob derrick                          robd@cherry.cray.com
RD> NOTE: TAE: Theistic Anti-Evolution(ist)
 
One opinion is that TAEs have a bloated sense of self-worth, and
when they encounter smart people who are more intelligent than they, 
the TAEs tend towards feelings of inadequacy (sp?). Would you not
agree that Ted Holden shows every sign of arrogance and hubris? When
this character trait is pointed out to them, or noted in general
conversation, they take the constructive criticism as proof of some
kind of conspiracy of/by Smart People to keep Those Who Know The Real
Truth (i.e. TAEs) silent.
 
There is also the added ego trip of "knowing something most people
do not," and the ego trip of being "one of the select few." Ted,
as the most obvious example, though the Kalki(s) also demonstrate
this behavior.
 
Then again, there is also the theory that TAEs do NOT actually
believe what they claim to believe; the theory says that some TAEs
only attack evolution, even though they agree that the evidence for
evolution is overwhelming, because their theist peers would not
approve, or their gods would not approve. This parallels the theory
that the loudest hate-filled anti-homosexual biggots are the ones
who fear they are homosexual, or fantasize homosexually.
 
There are many reasons why there are Theistic Anti-Evolution(ists).
The only thing one can be sure of is that one reason is =NOT= because
there is evidence that evolutionary theory is wrong---- there is no
such evidence, nor any reason to believe said evidence might be
found. The major reason is still superstition.
 
It still bugs me when someone here at work says "Oh, you believe
in evolution?" in a surprised, shocked, often horrified voice.
 
What else IS there?!?!?