Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utastro.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!utastro!padraig
From: padraig@utastro.UUCP (Padraig Houlahan)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: To Michael Ward
Message-ID: <1093@utastro.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 12-Mar-85 20:40:50 EST
Article-I.D.: utastro.1093
Posted: Tue Mar 12 20:40:50 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 16-Mar-85 02:08:37 EST
References: <1391@hao.UUCP> <786@uwmacc.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U. Texas, Astronomy, Austin, TX
Lines: 41

I must confess that I'm somewhat confused. Here are two quotes from
recent contributions made by Paul DuBois:

> (ii) I've already alluded to the notion that I do not definitely ascribe
> to very much.  In many cases I'm not sure that I accept ANY view,
> either those of creationists or of evolutionists.  (Technically, this
> is known as suspension of judgment.)  This ambivalence, unfortunately,
> doesn't help me very much in formulating a definite statement of
> (scientific) belief.  But I don't wish to use that for an excuse -
> it's just an explanation.
> 
> -- 
> Paul DuBois	{allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois          |

>>  [Isaac Dimitrovsky]
>> To the creationists on this net - come on, people! I can understand your
>> not posting detailed explanations of exactly what, besides the wrongness
>> of evolution, creationists believe. After all, it takes time to organize
>> your thoughts, do research, etc. However, ten days ago (Feb 28), Bill
>> Jefferys took the trouble to post the material quoted below, which is
>> apparently a statement which all applicants to the CRS must subscribe to.
>> At that time, he asked the creationists on the net whether they would be
>> willing to sign this statement, and, if not, what parts of the statement
>> they would disagree with. It certainly doesn't seem like too much trouble
>> to read an eighteen line statement and give your comments on it. If you
>> did so, some of the discussion in this group might take place in a bit
>> less of a vacuum. However, to date the only response I've seen has been
>> the one from Karen Gardner (who agreed with it completely). So, I close
>> with a plea to the big guns of creationism in this group to let us hear
>> what you have to say. Ray? Paul? Ken? Are you out there?
>
>I'd sign it.
>
>Paul DuBois	{allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!dubois          |

The first states that he definately does not ascribe to very much,
while the second indicates unconditional agreement with the CRS.
This seems to be self contradictory. Is there something that I'm
overlooking?

Padraig Houlahan.