Evolution versus Creationism Discussion

Peter Rauch anamaria at GRINNELL.BERKELEY.EDU
Wed Apr 22 10:58:06 CDT 1998

With all due respect to the Taxacom's father, as a mere subscriber, I
invite continued discussion and commentary about the ***NAS*** report on
evolution.  The fact that the previous poster mentioned the word
"creationism", comparing his concern about how he perceived the NAS
treatment of evolution (as non-science) to creationism's non-science is
hardly a discussion devolved into an evolution vs creationism debate.
His comments could have stood on their own legs even without his
sidetrack comparison (which I reproduce far below) with creationism.

So, please, if you wish to review the NAS publication on teaching
evolution, and to comment here, I certainly would like to know what you
think of their publication.

As the NAS publication asserts, it is not about the
creationism/evolution debate. It's about providing a coherent teaching
plan for various levels of K-12. Systematists surely can relate to that
and discuss it, leaving out the creationism issue unless it is
specifically brought up in the NAS publication itself, and the reviewer
feels it should be commented upon in that context.

Later, when the NAS publishes on creationism, maybe that should be
reviewed here as well?

On Wed, 22 Apr 1998, James H. Beach wrote:

> I would like to put a cap on the inevitable debate that would otherwise now
> ensue about evolution versus creationism.  Taxacom is not the best place
> for this.  Thank you.
> Jim Beach
> Listowner of Taxacom

> At 12:30 PM 4/22/98 -0400, you wrote:
     ...cut, cut...
> >As far as I am able to discern, evolution is generally taught as a doctrine
> >which focuses on the
> >assertion that certain things are true, and as such, is a mirror image to
> >the Creationists who apply
> >the same strategy.
     ...cut, cut...
> >John Grehan

More information about the Taxacom mailing list