Just thought I'd cheer things up a bit.  This is not an exact quote, but
apparently when the wife of the Archbishop of Canterbury read Darwin's "On the
Origin of Species" when it first was published, she said to her husband:

"Man descended from apes!  Pray it not be true, but if it is, that it not become
widely known"

By the way, that famous book is still a very timely and thought-provoking book in
my opinion, even though he was "proved" wrong on a few things.  I wonder how much
more he could have done if he had known of Mendel's experiments - which were
available at the time.
Sometimes I think that we, in our modern culture use Darwin's (and others)
principles as sort of a pop-culture thing to explain things in a way that appeals
to our current-day values and mores.  It is hard for lay people to be able to
discern between good science and some pseudo-scientist jumping on a pop-culture
Darwinian bandwagon to explain away everything.  I think this is the recourse of
choice for atheists.  I am not religious myself, and many of Darwin's theories
ring true for me (I find myself putting things in a Darwinian context out of
habit), but they can be twisted out of shape making some pop-psychologists who
argue against religion as ill-founded in my opinion as those pushing
creationism.  The voice of real scientists gets lost in the hysteria of
modern-day explanations for everything from the demise of the dinosaurs to why
teenagers sometimes shoot their peers.
Oops!  I've made this a downer again...sorry.

Nora Bryan
Clagray, Alberta
CANADA

[log in to unmask] wrote:

> Art,
>         I agree with your statement.  However, Ph.D. candidates are supposed
> to be under the direction of Academic advisors who are supposed to know
> better.  I fear that when it comes to the Evolution/Creation debate, both
> sides have become so entrenched in proving their point, defending their
> position and attacking each other that science overall has been the ultimate
> victim.  I was always taught that science was the search for truth.
> Evolutionists and creationists both claim to have the truth and both can cite
> numerous "scientific" evidences to support their claims.  As far as science
> is concerned, both are simply theories (I am sure I upset both camps with
> that statement).  All of us come to the table with our own biases.  I have my
> own bias as much as anyone.  It is important we recognize our own biases and
> compensate for them to insure that our work is honest and objective.  It is
> important that we come to the table as seekers rather than philosophers
> defending a creed.  From the seventh grade on, that is what I was taught that
> science was all about.  Is science no longer about objectivity or has it been
> reduced to simple rhetoric?
>
> Doug Shelton
> Alabama Malacological Research Center
> 2370-G Hillcrest Road #236
> Mobile, AL 36695  USA