Don Martin:
In Science for June 5, 1998, Sir Arthur C. Clarke of "2001" fame
says in his essay "Presidents, Experts, and Asteroids," pp 1532-3:
I have encountered a few "creationists" and because they were
usually nice, intelligent people (1), I have been unable to decide whether
they were _really_ mad, or only pretending to be mad. If I was a religious
person, I would consider creationism nothing less than blasphemy. Do its
adherents imagine that God is a cosmic hoaxer who has created that whole
vast fossil record for the sole purpose of misleading mankind?
And, although I do not necessarily agree with paleontologist Teilhard de
Chardin's advocacy of evolution as a proof of the glory of God, de Chardin's
attitude is both logical and inspiring. A creator who laid the foundations
for the entire future at the beginning of time is far more awesome than a
clumsy tinkerer who constantly modifies his creations and throws away entire
species in the process.
Even the Vatical, while firm in its declaration that the human soul is
divinely created and not subject to process (2), has stated that the theory
of physical evolution is more than just a hypothesis (1996).
_________
Uncle Don Martin's notes:
1. Clarke has obviously never met Appletoon.
2. Not being subject to process is a condition common to all unevidenced
objects.
1996. That is the year and not a note.
Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.
The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the
author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and
opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page.