Subject: Re: Creationism (was Re: "With All That You Acquire, Acquire
Understanding")
Date: 21 Jan 2000 03:06:53 GMT
From:  (Ken Smith)
Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian

Chris Ho-Stuart <> writes:

>Darren R Middleton <> wrote:
>[snip]
>> Try reading J.F Ashton PhD "In Six Days: Why 50 Scientists Choose To
>> Believe In Creation"
>> BTW, all have a PhD.

>Actually, not quite all; though this is not important.
>I have found and skimmed the book. Thanks for the reference.

>The book is a collection of very short comments by 50 scientists.
>It is not a good starting point for examination of the issues.
>The quality of the 50 entries is enormously variable; and the
>book merely presents them unremarked; it is (deliberately) simply
>a compilation of seperate very short pieces, each of which can do
>little more than summarize a view point.

>I would like to propose a better book for this issue, that should
>be accessible and acceptable to a wide range of readers.

>"The Creationists"
>Ronald L Numbers
>(published by Alfred A Knoff, Inc, 1992)
>ISBM 0-679-40104-0

>This book has been widely recommended from both sides of the divide.
>The author does not seek to refute or defend the arguements, but
>rather traces the history and the persons in the area of creationism.
>I strongly recommend this book to anyone, evolutionist or creationist,
>who wants to know about the people behind the creationist movement
>without getting bogged down in polemic.

Since Numbers started compiling the book a new variety of creationism
has appeared, using the words "intelligent design" or "irreducible
complexity".  And there has been the proliferation of books by Phillip
Johnson, a lawyer, starting with "Darwin on Trial".
A recent book which presents the background to these new creationist
ideas, and criticises their philosophical basis. is

Robert T. Pennock
Tower of Babel: The Evidence Against the New Creationism
(published by MIT Press 1999)
ISBN 0-262-16180-X

This updates the history of the creationist movement, and gives an
insight into more recent manoeuvres within that group.
It's slightly more polemical than Numbers, but doesn't get bogged
down.
I'll dig out a few phrases from the book and post them, for those
interested.

>Darren: I would be interested to know what you think of it, and
>commend it to you particularly as a useful step after Ashton's book.

>Cheers -- Chris

Ken Smith