I read with interest and amusement about the using a second pair
of chopsticks. I am an American of Japanese descent. When I was
growing up the practice was to reverse the ends of the chopsticks and
grab the food with the other end.
Later in life I went to lunch with some Japanese nationals at a Chinese
restaurant. The Japanese nationals noticed me reversing the ends of my chopsticks
to pick up the food. Like the Chinese they did not bother to reverse the ends of
their chopsticks. While reversing the ends of the chopsticks was done in Japan, it
was for formal occasions. Personally, I thought grabbing the food with the same end
that you eat with was gross. I think I did receive an e-mail from Japan saying something
about using a second set of chopsticks. So the Japanese like the Chinese may in some
cases use a second set of chopsticks. I don't know if the Chinese ever reverse the ends
of their chopsticks.
On Bertrand Horwitz's comments about William Jennings Bryan. I decided to do a little
checking. Horwitz accused Bryan of being anti science. To the contrary Bryan was
a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Horwitz also claims that Bryan said he was more interested in the rock of ages than the age of rocks. I found that quote in the play INHERIT THE WIND. I do not know if this statement was actually stated by Bryan..The authors of that play readily admitted their play was NOT supposed to be historically accurate. The play was basically a hack job on Bryan. The authors have the Bryan character saying he never read Darwin and never would. In fact Bryan DID read Darwin. Horwitz talks of Bryan representing people who believe in a literal biblical account. Bryan for the record did NOT believe in a literal six day creation. He was agnostic as to the age of the earth. For an account of the inaccuracies and misrepresentations of the Scopes trial see TORNADO
IN A JUNKYARD by James Perloff. He devotes an entire chapter to the matter. Burton Folsom had at
one time planned to do a book on the Scopes trial he pointed out that most or all of the evidence used
at the Scopes trial could not be used today. Horwitz is noticeably silent on the fraud of the Piltdown man
or the fraudulent drawings of Haeckel. The Scopes trial was cut short when Darrow changed the plea
from "not guilty" to "guilty." Darrow basically introduced the "evidence" for evolution then cut the trial
short to prevent any cross examination of that evidence. Horwitz's commentary on the Scopes trial seems to be based on a historically inaccurate play. Horwitz strikes me as a couch potato. I wonder if Horwitz still insists on using fraudulent evidence because it "proves" evolution? Does he agree with Darwin that the brain
of the Negro is closer to that of the ape than that of the White man?
Denysse O'Leary in her book DESIGN OR CHANCE wrote she had to discard her misconceptions of young earth creationists. As O'Leary cites one source as saying contrary to the misconception, the young earth creationists love science. Damadian who pioneered the development of the M.R.I. is a creationist.
If Horwitz is so dismissive of creationists, maybe he should refuse to have the M.R.I. used on him.
I should point out that the Intelligent Design movement is NOT synonymous with young earth creationism.
Some creationist view Intelligent Design as a backdoor to theistic evolution. Ironically atheistic evolutionist
view Intelligent Design as creationism.
Guy Takamatsu
# posted by GuyTak @ 12:50 PM
