While I am a historian and not a scientist and that may make a difference, I 
am really confused about what the problem is here. If the issue is that ID has 
never stood up to scientific questioning isn't that what the article is 
trying to solicit? Or is it that you can't have a religious faith of any kind and 
still be considered a scientist?  Didn't Einstein himself speak of the roles 
God must have had?  I am both a historian and a Christian and am not ashamed of 
either one and don't see them as conflictual.  Where are the major differences 
in creationism and evolution except for the time allotments? A story written 
2000 years ago got the order of creation right according to evolutionists, 
this must say something.  The recent Archaeological digs show there was a city of 
David right where it should have been.  
Its not just the Christian Religion either, if you've read the Utah Gold Rush 
you'll see that modern day science, history, and archaeology are close to 
proving the Aztec legends of the seven gold mines from their spiritual heritage.  
It seems to me it would make a lot of sense to use the history of people's 
faiths as a stepping stone to explore scientific and historic possibilities 
rather than to waste all the research theologians and philosophers have already 
collected. 

Annmarie Zan

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).