At 04:19 PM 3/12/97 -0500, you wrote:

fr> I'll surmise that you didn't indend for me to look up the
fr> term "occult" for you.  As for "cult," wouldn't it be 
fr> better 

ph> You had previously written:
ph> Let me know if you're the author of the occult nonsense 
ph> in that IMP-220A.ARJ file and I would be glad to cover 
ph> the scientific fallacies involved within.

ph> It was your use of the word "occult" that I was questioning.

You asked me to define it for you and I suggested you review
the contemporary word usage in a dictionary.  There should be
no need to ask someone to define word usage for you when it
should be an easy matter of looking it up yourself.  I must
surmise your query was stated ambiguously.

If you still wish for me to provide the description, let me know.

fr> Interesting. It should be a blasphemy to feel the need to give
fr> everyone a religion to try to make your need to have one seem
fr> reasonable, Paul.  It should also be a blasphemy to try to equate
fr> your spiritual faith with cold-hearted science.

ph> You do not deny a core system of beliefs do you? 

If I can work through the double negative employed here I must
guess that you're asking if I believe in anything.  The answer to
that is no.  I have no beliefs. Most fundamentalists would demand
that I believe there are no gods, of course, however that is a
mistake.  There is no evidence for gods and goddesses, warewolves
and vampires, ghosts and trickle-down-effects so the belief that
they exist, obverse with the belief they don't exist, isn't what
nearly all atheists hold true.

Anything without evidence doesn't deserve belief pro or con.
Since you're a fundamentalist Creationist, it's certain you'll
not be allowed to understand that -- please be assured that no
insult is intended yet there is near certainty you honestly
believe that everyone must believe in something.  Because of your
religious beliefs I can't fault you for such mistakes.

ph> For some, it's pleasure, ego, money, etc. 

Your classification of belief systems tend to be self-serving,
I notice.  Might I suggest that another trip to the dictionary
is in order?

fr> It would be far more honest to _ask_ what my religion is rather 
fr> than provide a social construct and a body of science, calling 
fr> them both religions.  Doing so simply devalues human spirit, don't 
fr> you think?

Mysteriously you elected not to explain why you feel the need 
to give everyone a religion.  You also failed to address the 
blasphemy to your gods in doing so as well as the belittleing
of your own faith.  If I had a theistic religion predicated in
faith, I most certainly wouldn't equate it to science and social
constructs.  That would be demeaning to both.

Why did you?  Is it a blasphmey or not?

Not everyone needs a religion, Paul.  Tribalism was required
for the survival of the primate species yet in contemporary
times the human species is evolving away from the need.  What
remains is an educational process to remove the legacy of
tribalism.  

Just because someone is weak and needs to contrive elaborate 
mythologies to avoid the uncomfortable and unavoidable eventuality 
of their own death doesn't mean that everyone must.  Death need 
not be feared.  It most certainly shouldn't drive otherwise healthy 
people to create gods and elaborate myths.  Death is simply a part 
of life -- something every atheist knows and accepts.

ph> No. Evolution definitely is a religion--an idol--for many.

As we both know evolution (which you continue to mistakenly
capitalize as though it were a proper noun, interestingly
enough) is a directly observed phenomena just as gravitation
is directly observed.  The fact of speciation isn't subject to
debate any more than gravity is.

There is certainly denial of the scientific truth.  That it's
done out of religious tribalism and willful ignorance is one
of those educational processes I mentioned previously.

Mysteriously you again failed to explain what you have been
told evolution is.  Now why would you "forget" to reply to my
question?  You also forgot to explain why you continue to
capitalize the word.

Won't you _please_ expend a little time and explain what you
have been told evolution is?  I've answered all of your questions
fully and honestly, why are you ignoring most of mine?

fr> No problem.  I'll piece together the scientific debunking of 
fr> your piece and place the results into an issue of Green Pastures.
fr> When the issue comes out in about a week I'll forward a copy.

ph> Thank you.	Paul

Any time.  This one is nearly complete.  I'll have to send it
through the editor for spelling and syntax correction yet it 
should be out by the end of next week.