Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

To: pby
I knew that the John Templeton Foundation and Dr. Karl Giberson did not support ID.

I don't support or adhere to ID either...but I would never quote Giberson and/or The John Templeton Foundation in defense of my objection to ID.

In your case, I believe that it is must be an instance enemy's enemy is my friend.

BTW, when creationists do guys call it quote-mining.

Nice try, but that's not quote mining.

Quote mining is taking parts of a quote out of context to try and make the quote appear as though the person was saying the opposite of what they were actually saying.

For example, Darwin in his writings anticipated a series of objections to his ideas, and then answered them, demonstrating why those objections were baseless. Several creationist websites have listed those objections without his answers, making it appear that Darwin knew his theories were flawed. That's quote mining.

This may be a case of strange bedfellows, or a broken clock being right twice a day (as in the case of Pat Robertson and radical feminists agreeing on pornography or the ACLU supporting Rush Limbaugh's case in Florida), but so long as Patrick Henry isn't misrepresenting their views on this subject it isn't quote mining.

134 posted on 12/05/2005 8:12:40 AM PST by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies ]

To: highball
Clearly, John Templeton and his Foundation do not outright reject ID as he/they provides/provide monetary grants for the research of ID and favorable quotes relative to ID exist on the Foundation's website.

The Foundation does not support the ID political/lobbying/legal wedge approach to the issue...But Templeton is quoted on the Foundation's website stating that "There is no knockdown argument for design and purpose" just "strong hints" for it.

John Templeton is deeply "religous", in a very universalist way, and believes that "Scientific revelations may be a goldmine for revitalizing religion in the 21st century."

Karl Giberson also states that, "Behe is right, of course, that there are many such complex things in nature that evolution cannot presently explain." (SAY IT AIN'T SO, Applied Developmental Science, Lawerence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.,

It is obvious that the context in which Giberson and The John Templeton Foundation disagree with ID is not the same context in which those at Darwin Central disagree with it.

Other than disdain for creationists, those at Darwin Central will probably not find much in common with Karl Giberson and John Marks Templeton (In fact, given history, I believe that many at Darwin Central would be calling these guys crackpots).

Maybe that is enough context for you...The standard seems much higher when it is the other way around.

309 posted on 12/05/2005 2:42:30 PM PST by pby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson