Home » Intelligent Design » SMU Darwinists try their hand at imitating Barbara Forrest

SMU Darwinists try their hand at imitating Barbara Forrest

Has Barbara Forrest ever accepted Bill Dembski’s debate invitation? [See The Vise Strategy Revisited and Barbara Forrest: Will The Real Coward Please Stand Up] Apparently not. Now it seems the Darwinists at Southern Methodist University (SMU) are trying pull off their own Barbara Forrest imitation. See: Are the Darwinists afraid to debate us?

Speaking of SMU, here are some events of interest:

The Intelligent Design Controversy

Thursday, April 12, William Dembski will be the featured speaker at the Dallas Christian Leadership luncheon at Southern Methodist University, to talk about the Intelligent Design Controversy.

Thursday, April 12, 2007
12:15pm – 1:30pm
SMU Umphrey Lee Center
Ballroom (3rd Floor)
Reservation Deadline: Noon Monday April 9

Ticket are $20 each, and for SMU Faculty/Staff $14 each, and available by calling DCL at (214) 349-1109

More Details

and

Darwin vs. Design Conference
Featuring Lee Strobel, Dr. Stephen Meyer, Dr. Michael Behe, Dr. Jay Richards
Friday-Saturday, April 13-14
Southern Methodist University, Dallas

More Details.

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

8 Responses to SMU Darwinists try their hand at imitating Barbara Forrest

  1. two words:

    Lee Strobel.

    Let’s assume these guys want a purely scientific debate. Having Lee Strobel on the bill makes it look like a religious seminar aimed at trying to make their views seem scientific. The guy is 100% a Christian apologist and a strict Bible literalist.

  2. Define “strict Bible literalist.” I’m not sure, but I don’t think that Lee Strobel is a Young Earth Creationist… I’m pretty sure he accepts an old Earth. Seems pretty hard to be called a “strict Bible literalist” and be an old-Earther at the same time.

  3. The problem is that the Bible isn’t very specific.

  4. Let’s assume these guys want a purely scientific debate. Having Lee Strobel on the bill makes it look like a religious seminar aimed at trying to make their views seem scientific. The guy is 100% a Christian apologist and a strict Bible literalist.

    All the more reason why the opposition shouldn’t be afraid to attend. A thickskulled Bible-thumper should be easy pickin’s for the superbrainy Darwinians, don’t you think?

    I keep envisioning Mike Tyson being afraid of stepping into the ring against Emo Philips.

  5. I think it’s just as problematic to say the Bible isn’t very specific as it is to label someone a “strict Bible literalist” when it seems clear that they do NOT take the Bible literally.

    To be sure, on some issues the Bible is NOT specific. But on others, it is VERY specific.

    Fross seems to be saying that there’s something “wrong” with being a Christian apologist… or that in the abstract, one cannot be a Christian apologist AND present a scientific case for something at the same time.

    I think there are likely two reasons for Strobel’s presence… in his book “Case for a Creator” he interviews Meyer, Behe and Richards (the other speakers) AND because by his own attestation, Strobel was once was a firm atheist… at least he WAS, until he started paying attention.

  6. What ever happened to Berlinski?
    He has always seemed to me to be the most enigmatic of the ID theorists.

    Could anyone sum up his ideas for me?

  7. DanaMcgee,

    I like Berlinski myself, but he seems elusive. He is pretty brilliant. I don’t know if he would call himself an ID advocate, though. I take his position as more of “Darwinism-Skeptic/ID-Sympathizer”. He recently presented at a Turkish ID conference, against Darwinism.

  8. John West pointed this out:

    A helpful correspondent directed us to the following statement on the website of Southern Methodist University, the location of the upcoming Darwin v. Design conference this Friday and Saturday:

    Founded in 1911 by what is now The United Methodist Church, SMU opened in 1915 with support from Dallas leaders. The University is nonsectarian in its teaching and committed to freedom of inquiry. (emphasis added)

    SMU faculty who want the Darwin v. Design conference banned from their campus might benefit from re-reading–and heeding–this statement.

Leave a Reply