Hey there, campers.

I got to work bright and early on Saturday (the weekends here are Thursdays and Fridays) and found this in my mailbox. Evidently, this Dr. Winder is a retired geologist with far too much time on his hands; who read my Evolution Fact Faq.

Now, the letter (his original is quoted, my response is as per usual; I'll leave his Email address intact, as he wants replies...):

Subject: Another Fact[sic]
Author: "c.g. winder" <cwinder@julian.uwo.ca>
Date: 9/16/98 12:34 PM

Good Morning, Dr. Winder. Thank you for your message.

> Herewith one more FACT for your bewildering array.

Why thank you. Unsolicited support. How nice.

> SPECIATION, the basic principle of Darwin's biological
> evolution, can be understood in Genesis 1,

Odd. I didn't realize that the Bible was a scientific text.
Further, given it's vagueness; it would appear that virtually
anything can or has been rationalized through the Bible over the
years.

> unless your mind is totally closed to such an idea.

Openness or closedness of mind to your prerequisites is not an
issue. Does Genesis also allow one to interpret quantum
mechanics? How about global tectonic synthesis? If, as you note,
the Bible does such a good job of harmonizing with a single
aspect of the continuum of organic evolution, why does it not
address the other sciences as well?

Could it be that the Bible is a tome of legend, transcribed oral
tradition and myth and as such is immensely allegorical?

> I convince most students in three minutes. Any over 20, it
> takes longer.

What kind of students? Bible students? I'd dare say you'd have a
bit more of a time of it if you were trying to promote this among a
group of geology graduate students; not to mention an Augean Task
with me.

> Analysis in Essay #1 of my website at <http://publish.uwo.ca/~cwinder/>

I've been there and looked over your writings. I'll be sending
along a bit of my musings on yours.

[Ed. note: check out this site. I'll d/l some of his writings and
give 'em the treatment. I wonder if the good Dr. Winder (a
geologist, gad) will be so friendly after we finish with him?]

> I have just added Essay #6, AN ABBREVIATED BUT COMPLETE HISTORY OF TIME,

I've read that essay. You attribute an amazing array of chores
to "God". But, before you go on describing what "God" did and
what "God's" characteristics are; shouldn't you first provide
evidence that such a "God" exists?

As a scientist, surely you know that claims require evidence.
I'd be laughed out of the boardroom here in the Middle East if I
presented a prospect for drilling based just upon what I felt
and my say-so alone. And well should I. My claim of oil in a
certain structure at a certain depth requires evidence;
otherwise is merely unsubstantiated opinion.

Why should your clearly more extraordinary claim of the
existence of a supernatural deity be exempt from what my mundane
claims demand?

> which is slightly longer than Geneis 1.

Is that like Genesis 1?

> Your comments are welcome.

Of that, I am glad. I'm not so sure you'll be, though.

> C. Gordon Winder, Prof.(emer.) of Geology
> University of Western Onatio,
> London Canada

Thank you, Dr. Winder.

"Onatio"?

Mail to follow.

Go Back