Jon Scott has a new website!
Chris Ho-Stuart
put together quite a stylish site called the talk.science archive.
It was modelled on the talk.origins site, and was intended to
counter to information available there.
Jon announced some time back that he was dismantling the talkscience
site, due to a change of heart.
The change of heart was fairly drastic! Jon has now produced a new
site, called "Genesis Panthesis". It is at
<http://genesispanthesis.tripod.com/>
The site is still quite new, and it looks like Jon has plans for
more material. But what is there will be quite fascinating for
those who remember Jon from discussions in talk.origins.
Cheers -- Chris Ho-Stuart
Adam Noel Harris
:talk.origins regulars may remember Jon Scott, the creationist who
In the FAQ, Jon describes how dinosaurs with feathers were a catalyst to
his "conversion." The damn fossil record whips the molecular hierarchies
again!
If I read it correctly, Jon not only abandoned creationism, but
Christianity as well. I think it's time that mainstream Christian
denominations became more vocal in their opposition to creationism (they
know what it means, even if Brian Mueller doesn't). It really does damage
their religion.
Every so often, someone starts a thread here asking if anyone ever changes
their beliefs because of talk.origins. T.o surely had a hand in Jon's
change of heart. Through t.o and its web site, he came to understand what
the evolutionists were claiming. It took much more to break down his
denial of the evidence, but I don't see how he would have gotten to that
point without understanding evolution first.
-Adam
--
Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of Stanford University.
PGP Fingerprint = C0 65 A2 BD 8A 67 B3 19 F9 8B C1 4C 8E F2 EA 0E
Dick C.
<slrn8nps2u...@elaine34.Stanford.EDU>:
So true, and after reading his FAQ, all I can say is wow!
He is obviously in the process of building the site, but so far
it is quite well done.
--
Dick #1349
People think that libraries are safe places, but they're not,
they have ideas.
email: dic...@uswest.net
Homepage http://www.users.uswest.net/~dickcr/
Honus
> Jon announced some time back that he was dismantling the talkscience
> site, due to a change of heart.
>
> The change of heart was fairly drastic! Jon has now produced a new
> site, called "Genesis Panthesis". It is at
> <http://genesispanthesis.tripod.com/>
I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time buying this.
"Then, in september of 1999, the bomb dropped. I
picked up my issue of the
National Geographic and saw what else on a page
advertising an upcoming issue;
but Sinosauropteryx millenii! It had long
steak-knife-shaped teeth like a T. rex,
a long, muscular tail, hyper-extendable
"swith-blade" claws on the hind legs like
Velociraptor mongoliensis, a narrow snout that
looked almost like a bill, a
bird-like pubic structure, and worst of all -
feathers!
I simply stared at the page for a few moments,
muttered "oh shit!" to myself a
few times, and got up to check the N.G.News website.
This wasn't just some
artistic depiction of what a reptile/bird might look
like - and it was no hoax. It
was a small dromaeosaurid ("raptor") with killing
claws, razor-sharp teeth, and a
pair of wing-like arms complete with plumage. My
heart sank, and my gut
churned. This was it - the one proof of evolution I
had always asked for but
never thought would come to light. In my mind, I was
betting that even if
evolution were true, the chances of finding such a
beautiful example of transition
would be slim enough to be dismissed as impossible.
And yet here it was -
proof."
Am I alone in my disbelief?
--
"It's too bad ignorance isn't painful."
Anonymous
Chris Ho-Stuart
I don't see the problem. I think you may be quoting a post by Jon.
He has a similar comment in his FAQ. I don't know why this particular
fossil was the final straw, but I don't find it at all implausible.
Of course, there are heaps of other transitionals; but one can
only deny their obvious transitional form for so long. It looks
like Jon plans to put up a list of transitional fossils, under
the heading "Archive of Found Missing Links". Cute heading.
This has been a fairly long time coming for Jon. I can't see
any reasonable alternative than a perfectly genuine change of
world view, nor any reason not to take it at face value.
Cheers -- Chris
Wade Hines
The danger of scientific creationism then seems to be that some
of its practitioners might pick up enough science along the way
to reach that most difficult of points for any scientist --- to
abandon ones hypothesis: the one you really wanted to be true.
Did I say the danger?
Well perhaps the danger lies in how difficult it can be for
someone to abandon their hypothesis for the mere existence
of contradictory data. Very few have done so gracefully. In
the above case, a particular bit of data was key: one which
was specifically held out as impossible and defining (if for
rather capricious reasons).
mefle...@my-deja.com
Chris Ho-Stuart <host...@sky.fit.qut.edu.au> wrote:
>
> Jon announced some time back that he was dismantling the talkscience
> site, due to a change of heart.
>
I think his change of heart can be seen in the web page.
The web page is very cool looking but dark. I have mixed
feelings about the site, it appears a little depressing, but
perhaps that is the point. Evolution is kinda depressing
when you previously believed creationism.
> The change of heart was fairly drastic! Jon has now produced a new
> site, called "Genesis Panthesis". It is at
> <http://genesispanthesis.tripod.com/>
I sent Jon e-mail. I asked if he would like help. If he
wants help I hope that he gets it since it looks like the
beginnings of a very good site.
Mark
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Honus
> >
> >> Jon announced some time back that he was dismantling the talkscience
> >> site, due to a change of heart.
> >>
> >> site, called "Genesis Panthesis". It is at
> >> <http://genesispanthesis.tripod.com/>
> >
> > I simply stared at the page for a few moments, muttered "oh
> > shit!" to myself a few times, and got up to check the N.G.News
> > website. This wasn't just some artistic depiction of what a
> > reptile/bird might look like - and it was no hoax. It was a
> > small dromaeosaurid ("raptor") with killing claws, razor-sharp
> > teeth, and a pair of wing-like arms complete with plumage. My
> > heart sank, and my gut churned. This was it - the one proof of
> > evolution I had always asked for but never thought would come
> > to light. In my mind, I was betting that even if evolution
> > were true, the chances of finding such a beautiful example of
> > transition would be slim enough to be dismissed as impossible.
> > And yet here it was - proof."
> >
> > Am I alone in my disbelief?
>
> I don't see the problem. I think you may be quoting a post by Jon.
> He has a similar comment in his FAQ. I don't know why this particular
> fossil was the final straw, but I don't find it at all implausible.
I guess it was the "Oh, shit" muttered several times coupled with the
statement that one transitional proved to be enough for him that threw
me off. ;) (Especially considering the recent screw up in Nat'l Geo.
about the "composite fossil" from China.) I seem to be wrong, though.
This is really something! (Not me being wrong, of course!) <gbg>
> Of course, there are heaps of other transitionals; but one can
> only deny their obvious transitional form for so long.
I can't agree with that. I fully expect Gish, Morris and Co. to go to
their graves denying the obvious.
> This has been a fairly long time coming for Jon. I can't see
> any reasonable alternative than a perfectly genuine change of
> world view, nor any reason not to take it at face value.
I think one reasonable alternative would be perhaps fakery on the part
of someone else. That doesn't seem to be the case here, though, since
his other site is gone. (At least as far as I can tell.)
Adam Noel Harris
:In article <397c...@news.qut.edu.au>,
: Chris Ho-Stuart <host...@sky.fit.qut.edu.au> wrote:
:>
:> Jon announced some time back that he was dismantling the talkscience
:> site, due to a change of heart.
:
:I think his change of heart can be seen in the web page.
:The web page is very cool looking but dark. I have mixed
:feelings about the site, it appears a little depressing, but
:perhaps that is the point. Evolution is kinda depressing
:when you previously believed creationism.
:> The change of heart was fairly drastic! Jon has now produced a new:I sent Jon e-mail. I asked if he would like help. If he
:wants help I hope that he gets it since it looks like the
:beginnings of a very good site.
There are a lot of mistatements in the page about mutations (IIRC, it's in
the FAQ section). Maybe we should invite him to submit his pages to "peer
review" on t.o prior to putting them up on the site. He could, of course,
publish without changing any of it, but we'd probably all benefit from the
discussion.
Hofstad314
>In the FAQ, Jon describes how dinosaurs with feathers were a catalyst to
>his "conversion." The damn fossil record whips the molecular hierarchies
>again!
Goodness, that's ironic. There are at least some ornithologists who are very
skeptical of the dinosaur-bird connection--the name Feduccia comes to mind. I
don't pretend to know who is right, but the dinosaur-bird connection wouldn't
be the smoking gun I would use as "proof" of evolution, given the dissent on
this subject within the scientific community.
>If I read it correctly, Jon not only abandoned creationism, but
>Christianity as well. I think it's time that mainstream Christian
>denominations became more vocal in their opposition to creationism (they
>know what it means, even if Brian Mueller doesn't). It really does damage
>their religion.
>
Yeah, speaking as a Christian and an evolutionist, this is depressing.
Donald Johnson
mel turner
hofst...@aol.com wrote...
>Adam Noel Harris wrote:
>>In the FAQ, Jon describes how dinosaurs with feathers were a
catalyst to
>>his "conversion." The damn fossil record whips the molecular
hierarchies
>>again!
>
>Goodness, that's ironic. There are at least some ornithologists who
are very
>skeptical of the dinosaur-bird connection--the name Feduccia comes to
>mind.
Yeah, there are a number of such hold-outs, but the consensus is that
birds are a specialized subgroup of the theropod Dinosauria:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/archaeopteryx.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part1b.html
http://www.dinosauria.com/jdp/jdp.htm#archie
http://dinosaur.umbc.edu
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/avians.html
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/birds/archaeopteryx.html
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/vertebrates/flight/enter.html
http://www.peabody.yale.edu/exhibits/cfd/CFDclad2.html
http://www-geology.ucdavis.edu:8000/~GEL3/SHORTCH14.html
http://biology.fullerton.edu/biol404/hol/hol_ch13.html
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/diapsids/dinolinks.html
>I
>don't pretend to know who is right, but the dinosaur-bird connection
wouldn't
>be the smoking gun I would use as "proof" of evolution, given the
>dissent on this subject within the scientific community.
Well, there's no scientific skepticism at all about a _reptile_-bird
connection, and Archaeopteryx is a very nice "smnoking gun" whether
it's the theropod dinosaurs or some other type of reptile that it
connects the modern birds to. It's one of the most dramatic and most
familiar, but hardly the only known fossil intermediate between major
animal groups.
>>If I read it correctly, Jon not only abandoned creationism, but
>>Christianity as well. I think it's time that mainstream Christian
>>denominations became more vocal in their opposition to creationism
(they
>>know what it means, even if Brian Mueller doesn't). It really does
damage
>>their religion.
> Yeah, speaking as a Christian and an evolutionist, this is
>depressing.
That seems a consequence of creationists' claims that "evolutionism"
is atheistic. When people believe them, it can backfire.
cheers
Bio Hazard
it's in
> the FAQ section). Maybe we should invite him to submit his pages to
"peer
> review" on t.o prior to putting them up on the site. He could, of
course,
> publish without changing any of it, but we'd probably all benefit
from the
> discussion.
You don't have to ask me twice!
--
- Jon Scott
http://genesispanthesis.tripod.com
"If God didn't have a sense of humor -- were did the Christians come
from?"
Adam Noel Harris
:> There are a lot of mistatements in the page about mutations (IIRC,
:it's in
:> the FAQ section). Maybe we should invite him to submit his pages to
:"peer
:> review" on t.o prior to putting them up on the site. He could, of
:course,
:> publish without changing any of it, but we'd probably all benefit
:from the
:> discussion.
:
:You don't have to ask me twice!
So will you do it? Oh, shoot, I asked again.
David Kellogg
> talk.origins regulars may remember Jon Scott, the creationist who
> put together quite a stylish site called the talk.science archive.
> It was modelled on the talk.origins site, and was intended to
> counter to information available there.
>
> Jon announced some time back that he was dismantling the talkscience
> site, due to a change of heart.
>
> The change of heart was fairly drastic! Jon has now produced a new
> site, called "Genesis Panthesis". It is at
> <http://genesispanthesis.tripod.com/>
>
> The site is still quite new, and it looks like Jon has plans for
> more material. But what is there will be quite fascinating for
> those who remember Jon from discussions in talk.origins.
I'm impressed and amazed. I wonder if there's a support group for
ex-creationists?
David Kellogg
Assistant Director, University Writing Program
Duke University
(919) 660-4357; FAX (919) 660-4372
http://www.duke.edu/~kellogg
Mark Isaak
David Kellogg <kel...@duke.edu> wrote:
>I'm impressed and amazed. I wonder if there's a support group for
>ex-creationists?
There used to be a Fundamentalists Anonymous, but I'm not sure they exist
as such any more. http://www.ifas.org/wa/ ("Walk Away") lists several
resources, but nothing that really qualifies as a support group.
--
Mark Isaak atta @ best.com http://www.best.com/~atta
"The commonest fallacy is to suppose that since the state of doubt
is accompanied by a feeling of uncertainty, knowledge arises when
this feeling gives way to one of assurance." - John Dewey