[Vision2020] Animal Abusers, Welcome to Red Idaho!

[Paul Rumelhart]

heirdoug at netscape.net wrote:

>I just have to wonder if there is any direct correlation between the 
>topic below and the teaching Mr. Gier espouses with respect to the 
>human baby inside a mother not being a true person worthy of dignity. 
>Or Mr. Gier's teaching that animals are the same as humans. Both of 
>which he gleaned from the materialistic teaching of Darwinism.
>
>Ideas have consequences!
>  
>

The phrase "the materialistic teaching of Darwinism" annoys me.  Darwin 
was not a mystic who gathered information from visions or by looking at 
chicken entrails, and he was not a con man who thought up a system by 
which he could make the world conform to his desires by brainwashing the 
populous in some twisted, nefarious scheme.  He was a scientist.  He 
observed nature, theorized about it, and made predictions based on those 
theories.  Predictions which could be tested in the true scientific 
fashion.  One big prediction of his, for example, was the existence of a 
method by which information could be passed from parent to child.  He 
didn't know what it would look like, but it had to be there or his 
theory was bunk.  DNA nicely fits the bill.

Scientists follow the evidence.  The world is what it is, no matter what 
they would like it to be.  If the conclusions of "Darwinism" are at odds 
with faith, so be it.  If it teaches that Man is not really so different 
from Animal, despite some book saying we are, that's the way it goes.  
Scientists are engaged in a noble cause, the search for Truth.  They 
shouldn't back away from a line of inquiry just because they don't like 
the implications.  To do that would be cowardly.

Paul