Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site qubix.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!cmcl2!seismo!hao!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!decwrl!sun!qubix!lab
From: lab@qubix.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Honesty
Message-ID: <1157@qubix.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 1-Jun-84 23:53:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: qubix.1157
Posted: Fri Jun  1 23:53:06 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 5-Jun-84 19:41:25 EDT
References: <2483@allegra.UUCP>
Organization: Qubix Graphic Systems, Saratoga, CA
Lines: 23

Alan Driscoll:
> [quoting me]
> > Again, we are NOT talking about the "christian version of creation."
> > This is NOT a religious discussion, but whether a certain model
> > SUPPORTED ONLY BY SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCES should be presented.
>
> Larry, if you're telling us that creationism is a scientific
> theory, and nothing more, then I'm calling you a liar. I just
> don't believe that you believe what you want us to believe.

Pardon my mistake - I assumed Netters could read. SCIENTIFIC creationism
*is* a SCIENTIFIC model.  The favorite ploy of {press,courts,ACLU,etc.}
is to deliberately confuse SCIENTIFIC creation with BIBLICAL creation.
Whether the conclusion is the same is not material; *how* the conclusion
is arrived at *is* material. (E.g., the book of Ubizmo says 2+2=4;
should we then discard arithmetic from schools?)

BTW, anyone telling me that evolutionism "is a scientific theory, and
nothing more," is a liar.
-- 
			The Ice Floe of Larry Bickford
			{decvax,ihnp4,allegra,ucbvax}!{decwrl,sun}!qubix!lab
			decwrl!qubix!lab@Berkeley.ARPA