<html>
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 10 (filtered)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{font-family:Arial;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle18
{font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> Did
Eugenie Scott point out that at the most general level the entire Creation
Science argument is based on a fairly clear non-sequitur in reasoning? The
observation of complex systems or patterns is not a logical basis for
concluding the involvement of an intelligent creator in that object, nor does
it imply the existence of such a creator or being. This does not belie that God
exists. Of course God exists. But still the logical connection above is
fallacious. </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Bob Dickow</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>-----Original Message-----<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>From:</span></b> vision2020-bounces@moscow.com
[mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com] <b><span style='font-weight:bold'>On
Behalf Of </span></b>Michael<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Thursday, October 13, 2005
11:27 AM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> vision2020@moscow.com<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> [Vision2020] Eugenie
Scott's Talk at U of I</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>I attended the presentation by Eugenie Scott last
night at the U of I regarding the scientific qualification of Creation Science
and Intelligent Design. I enjoyed the talk very much. Scott is a
fabulous public speaker and has put together a high quality PowerPoint
presentation. She also appears to be highly qualified to speak to the subject.
Many aspects of the talk were also </span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>