From twallace@trueorigin.org Tue Sep 7 08:25 EDT 1999 Received: from mail.ncifcrf.gov (mail.ncifcrf.gov [129.43.100.100]) by ncisun1-nf0.ncifcrf.gov (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA16138 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 1999 08:25:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from floyd.qis.net (floyd.qis.net [209.150.96.22]) by mail.ncifcrf.gov (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA09396 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 1999 08:26:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from trueorigin.org (pm3-balt-162.qis.net [209.150.97.162]) by floyd.qis.net (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id IAA22409; Tue, 7 Sep 1999 08:25:42 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <37D503D4.671B73FC@trueorigin.org> Date: Tue, 07 Sep 1999 08:23:48 -0400 From: Timothy Wallace Organization: TrueOrigin Archive X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Schneider , feedback@trueorigin.org Subject: Re: TrueOrigin Feedback Response References: <199909070313.XAA09080@kaylor.ncifcrf.gov> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Length: 4195 Status: O Mr. Schneider, I am not a scientist, but I have better things to do with my limited time than major on minor issues and entertain your stream of false accusations (repeated ad nauseam and without substantiation), false claims (also repeated without substantiation from empirical science), and evasion of personal responsibility. It so happens that I am indeed being "polite", and that I am not "all upset" (your suggestions to the contrary notwithstanding). If you consider yourself to have suffered a "verbal attack" for having been asked to take responsibility for your own words, then you have a personal problem with honesty and fairness, and we certainly do indeed have nothing more to discuss. You began this dialogue accusing me of not understanding that the entropy of an unisolated system can decrease, at the expense of it surroundings. I have since clearly indicated that I do indeed understand this, yet you have persisted in inferring that I do not. When asked to substantiate (i.e., document) your claim, you have consistently evaded responsibility for your accusation, attempting instead to lead our dialogue wherever you fancy to go with it. Your pretense to "understand" that I "think it rarely happens" is based on the same brand of assumption (i.e., false, arbitrary, and unsubstantiated) as your initial erroneous claim. My refusal to cooperate with your manipulative attempt at "teacher-student" role playing shouldn't be interpreted as indicative of my understanding. As long as you refuse to withdraw your original accusation, acknowledging it as erroneous, you are in no position to frame further questions, require additional answers, or pile on more pretentious claims or accusations. > Are you willing to make a clear positive statement about the > Second Law? I have already stated unequivocally that my understanding is that the entropy of an unisolated system can decrease, at the expense of it surroundings. That this phenomenon routinely takes place as an integral part of observable biological processes is also quite apparent. (What I have resisted from the beginning has been playing into your pretense that this fact somehow supports your belief in evolution.) If you don't think you have been "blithely skipping along" without taking responsibility for your words (which I asked you to do several times), then what exactly do you think you have been doing? If you don't think falsely and deliberately inferring that I believe something amounts to "bearing false witness", then what exactly do you think it is? If you don't think the person who engages in these actions may be accurately described as a "perpetrator", then how exactly do you think he should more accurately be described? You only make matters worse by piling on further arbitrary accusations ("all upset", "scared and angry", "nasty words"). My reaction to your behavior may not seem exceptionally friendly, but I assure you that it is not a reflection of my being "all upset, scared or angry". > Your nasty words seem inconsistent to me since I thought you > were coming from a philosophy that teaches that god is love, > and that one should love ones fellows. Was I wrong? Neither Jesus Himself, nor the apostles who documented His teaching, shrank back from identifying men's sins -- and right to their faces, at that. Loving you has nothing to do with downplaying or ignoring your personal failure to live up to God's standards. Whether you like it or not, when you unblushingly and repeatedly violate these standards in the context of our correspondence, it is my duty to bring this to your attention. This brings our correspondence to an end for the time being. Kind Regards, -- Timothy Wallace twallace@trueorigin.org http://www.trueorigin.org “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall not pass away.” — Jesus Christ (Matthew 24:35) “He is a God unchangeable. He has not altered the thing which has gone out of his mouth, nor called back one single consolatory sentence. ...Therefore, seeing that it is the word of a God so true, so immutable, so powerful, so wise, I will and must believe the promise.” — Charles Spurgeon