Russell Williams
Well-Known Member
July 23, 2011
Letters to the Editor
Dear editor,
In the past several months, in the editorial pages of this newspaper, there has been much back and forth about creationism, intelligent design, and evolution. Those who feel uncomfortable with the teaching of evolution seem to base their arguments on one or more of four difficulties they see with evolutionary theory. 1) not all parts of evolutionary theory have been fully explained. 2) quotes about evolutionary theory can be found in which some scientists have, in the past, questioned some parts of evolutionary theory.(1) 3) there are some professional people who have signed statements questioning evolution.4) students are not given the chance to evaluate alternative theories and teachers are afraid to teach alternative theories.
Some or all of these problems apply to other popular theories about other natural and/or social phenomena. Yet people opposed to the idea of evolution do not complain about the teaching of these other theories even though some of these other theories have the same problems that the theory of evolution has. Students are taught the theory of gravity and yet no one has fully explained how gravity works. Scientists talk about gravitons being the cause of gravitational attraction but there is no universal acceptance of how gravitons work, how fast gravitons travel, or what gravitons look like or are composed of. While people argue that the lack of full explanation invalidates the theory of evolution I have not heard people arguing that the lack of full explanation invalidates the theory of gravity nor that teachers should spend class time allowing students to do experiments to find out if gravity exists and to do research to find out what scientists are saying about the existence of gravity
There is the theory that the Earth is heated by the sun. Schools do not teach other possible theories and yet those people opposing the teaching of evolution as fact do not complain about the lack of presentation of alternative theories about the cause of the surface warmth of the earth. Years ago I read through a book about the lost continent of Mu and the author explained that the sun could not be the source of Earth's warmth because as you go up a mountain and thus farther from the center of the earth the temperature goes down. I have not seen people arguing class time should be used to allow students to independently form their own opinions about whether or not the source of the surface heat on the earth is from the sun or from the inside of the earth.
There is much evidence that everything in our solar system revolves around the earth. Another theory holds that the earth and all the planets revolve around the sun. Those who believe that the earth is the center of the solar system can point to a quote from the noted astronomer Galileo, "I must altogether abandon the false opinion that the sun is the centre of the world, and moves, and that I must not hold, defend, or teach in any way whatsoever, verbally or in writing" (2) . However no one seems to be arguing that class time should be spent allowing students to review the Copernican theory and the Ptolemaic theory and then make up their own minds as to which is correct.
In some quarters there is a great deal of argument about whether or not the Holocaust ever actually occurred. Books and articles on both side of this issue can be found (3). Some people are quite willing to argue that that students should be exposed to both sides of the evolutionary debate and make up their own minds but I have not read of them arguing that class time should be used so that students can be presented with materials claiming and denying the existence of the Holocaust and letting the students make up their own minds about whether or not the Holocaust is a myth.
The simple truth is that the Holocaust is a fact not a theory and the same holds for a heliocentric solar system, the sun being the source of the Earth's surface temperatures, the existence of gravity, and the existence of evolution. For someone to argue that only evolution should be questioned and that all of the rest should be accepted as facts is to apply standards for the acceptance of evolution that are very different from the standards applied for the acceptance of all of the rest.
To clarify my position, I know that gravity exists, the planets revolve around the sun, the surface of the earth is warmed by the sun, that the Holocaust happened, and that evolution has occurred and continues to occur.
Yours truly,
Russell Williams
301-797-1201
(1) scientists questioning evolution http://richarddawkins.net/articles/...lter-exposed-the-intelligent-design-movement: Two of the most vehement ID advocates are Michael Behe and William Dembski. Behe is a professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University and one of very few ID proponents who is actually a scientist with an established research record. In 1996 Behe published Darwin's Black Box, which claims to present a biochemical challenge to evolutionary biology, a claim that has been thoroughly opposed, for example, by Brown University biology professor Kenneth Miller. It is hard for most of us to follow the technical arguments, but Behe would be the first to admit (and in fact does so on his academic Web site) that he is very lonely among his peers in advocating ID.
(2) the apology of Galileo. http://everything2.com/title/Galileo%27s+apology+for+the+Dialogue+on+the+Great+World+Systems I, Galileo Galilei, son of the late Vincenzo Galilei, Florentine, aged seventy years, arraigned personally before this tribunal, and kneeling before you, most Eminent and Reverend Lord Cardinals, Inquisitors general against heretical depravity throughout the whole Christian Republic, having before my eyes and touching with my hands, the holy Gospels -- swear that I have always believed, do now believe, and by God's help will for the future believe, all that is held, preached, and taught by the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church. But whereas -- after an injunction had been judicially intimated to me by this Holy Office, to the effect that I must altogether abandon the false opinion that the sun is the centre of the world, and moves, and that I must not hold, defend, or teach in any way whatsoever, verbally or in writing, the said doctrine, and after it had been notified to me that the said doctrine was contrary to Holy Scripture -- I wrote and printed a book in which I discuss this doctrine already condemned, and adduce arguments of great cogency in its favour, without presenting any solution of these; and for this cause I have been pronounced by the Holy Office to be vehemently suspected of heresy, that is to say, of having held and believed that the sun is the centre of the world and immovable, and that the earth is not the centre and moves.
( 3) Denying the Holocaust. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial. In 1964, French historian Paul Rassinier published The Drama of the European Jews. Rassinier was himself a concentration camp survivor (imprisoned in Buchenwald for his having helped French Jews escape the Nazis), and modern-day deniers continue to cite his works as scholarly research that questions the accepted facts of the Holocaust
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/the_holocaust.php
Among the important points covered in this presentation are: -how it was officially claimed and supposedly proved at Nuremberg (and verified" by governments) that there were gassings of Jews at camps in Germany proper, such as Dachau. That is now completely rejected by everyone. Now it is only claimed that there were gassings at six camps in what is now Poland. (The only reason that people still claim gassings at those camps in Poland is because those camps came under Soviet control after the war and couldn't be investigated by the West.) As this individual points out, the "evidence" for the so-called gassings at the camps in Poland is neither qualitatively different nor more abundant than the already discredited and rejected "evidence" for gassings at camps in Germany proper (which no one believes (sorry about quoting the last bazarre paragraph but, without documentation some people might doubt that suce bazarre reasoning actually exists RFW)
Letters to the Editor
Dear editor,
In the past several months, in the editorial pages of this newspaper, there has been much back and forth about creationism, intelligent design, and evolution. Those who feel uncomfortable with the teaching of evolution seem to base their arguments on one or more of four difficulties they see with evolutionary theory. 1) not all parts of evolutionary theory have been fully explained. 2) quotes about evolutionary theory can be found in which some scientists have, in the past, questioned some parts of evolutionary theory.(1) 3) there are some professional people who have signed statements questioning evolution.4) students are not given the chance to evaluate alternative theories and teachers are afraid to teach alternative theories.
Some or all of these problems apply to other popular theories about other natural and/or social phenomena. Yet people opposed to the idea of evolution do not complain about the teaching of these other theories even though some of these other theories have the same problems that the theory of evolution has. Students are taught the theory of gravity and yet no one has fully explained how gravity works. Scientists talk about gravitons being the cause of gravitational attraction but there is no universal acceptance of how gravitons work, how fast gravitons travel, or what gravitons look like or are composed of. While people argue that the lack of full explanation invalidates the theory of evolution I have not heard people arguing that the lack of full explanation invalidates the theory of gravity nor that teachers should spend class time allowing students to do experiments to find out if gravity exists and to do research to find out what scientists are saying about the existence of gravity
There is the theory that the Earth is heated by the sun. Schools do not teach other possible theories and yet those people opposing the teaching of evolution as fact do not complain about the lack of presentation of alternative theories about the cause of the surface warmth of the earth. Years ago I read through a book about the lost continent of Mu and the author explained that the sun could not be the source of Earth's warmth because as you go up a mountain and thus farther from the center of the earth the temperature goes down. I have not seen people arguing class time should be used to allow students to independently form their own opinions about whether or not the source of the surface heat on the earth is from the sun or from the inside of the earth.
There is much evidence that everything in our solar system revolves around the earth. Another theory holds that the earth and all the planets revolve around the sun. Those who believe that the earth is the center of the solar system can point to a quote from the noted astronomer Galileo, "I must altogether abandon the false opinion that the sun is the centre of the world, and moves, and that I must not hold, defend, or teach in any way whatsoever, verbally or in writing" (2) . However no one seems to be arguing that class time should be spent allowing students to review the Copernican theory and the Ptolemaic theory and then make up their own minds as to which is correct.
In some quarters there is a great deal of argument about whether or not the Holocaust ever actually occurred. Books and articles on both side of this issue can be found (3). Some people are quite willing to argue that that students should be exposed to both sides of the evolutionary debate and make up their own minds but I have not read of them arguing that class time should be used so that students can be presented with materials claiming and denying the existence of the Holocaust and letting the students make up their own minds about whether or not the Holocaust is a myth.
The simple truth is that the Holocaust is a fact not a theory and the same holds for a heliocentric solar system, the sun being the source of the Earth's surface temperatures, the existence of gravity, and the existence of evolution. For someone to argue that only evolution should be questioned and that all of the rest should be accepted as facts is to apply standards for the acceptance of evolution that are very different from the standards applied for the acceptance of all of the rest.
To clarify my position, I know that gravity exists, the planets revolve around the sun, the surface of the earth is warmed by the sun, that the Holocaust happened, and that evolution has occurred and continues to occur.
Yours truly,
Russell Williams
301-797-1201
(1) scientists questioning evolution http://richarddawkins.net/articles/...lter-exposed-the-intelligent-design-movement: Two of the most vehement ID advocates are Michael Behe and William Dembski. Behe is a professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University and one of very few ID proponents who is actually a scientist with an established research record. In 1996 Behe published Darwin's Black Box, which claims to present a biochemical challenge to evolutionary biology, a claim that has been thoroughly opposed, for example, by Brown University biology professor Kenneth Miller. It is hard for most of us to follow the technical arguments, but Behe would be the first to admit (and in fact does so on his academic Web site) that he is very lonely among his peers in advocating ID.
(2) the apology of Galileo. http://everything2.com/title/Galileo%27s+apology+for+the+Dialogue+on+the+Great+World+Systems I, Galileo Galilei, son of the late Vincenzo Galilei, Florentine, aged seventy years, arraigned personally before this tribunal, and kneeling before you, most Eminent and Reverend Lord Cardinals, Inquisitors general against heretical depravity throughout the whole Christian Republic, having before my eyes and touching with my hands, the holy Gospels -- swear that I have always believed, do now believe, and by God's help will for the future believe, all that is held, preached, and taught by the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church. But whereas -- after an injunction had been judicially intimated to me by this Holy Office, to the effect that I must altogether abandon the false opinion that the sun is the centre of the world, and moves, and that I must not hold, defend, or teach in any way whatsoever, verbally or in writing, the said doctrine, and after it had been notified to me that the said doctrine was contrary to Holy Scripture -- I wrote and printed a book in which I discuss this doctrine already condemned, and adduce arguments of great cogency in its favour, without presenting any solution of these; and for this cause I have been pronounced by the Holy Office to be vehemently suspected of heresy, that is to say, of having held and believed that the sun is the centre of the world and immovable, and that the earth is not the centre and moves.
( 3) Denying the Holocaust. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial. In 1964, French historian Paul Rassinier published The Drama of the European Jews. Rassinier was himself a concentration camp survivor (imprisoned in Buchenwald for his having helped French Jews escape the Nazis), and modern-day deniers continue to cite his works as scholarly research that questions the accepted facts of the Holocaust
http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/the_holocaust.php
Among the important points covered in this presentation are: -how it was officially claimed and supposedly proved at Nuremberg (and verified" by governments) that there were gassings of Jews at camps in Germany proper, such as Dachau. That is now completely rejected by everyone. Now it is only claimed that there were gassings at six camps in what is now Poland. (The only reason that people still claim gassings at those camps in Poland is because those camps came under Soviet control after the war and couldn't be investigated by the West.) As this individual points out, the "evidence" for the so-called gassings at the camps in Poland is neither qualitatively different nor more abundant than the already discredited and rejected "evidence" for gassings at camps in Germany proper (which no one believes (sorry about quoting the last bazarre paragraph but, without documentation some people might doubt that suce bazarre reasoning actually exists RFW)
