Reasons for creation
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-11-2011, 09:45 PM
RE: Reasons for creation
(28-11-2011 09:18 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 09:01 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 08:44 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  
(28-11-2011 08:35 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Yikes, Woof! He ain't a Calvinist, he's a Baptist. Might as well call Lemaitre a sick puppy for giving us the primeval atom and an indifferent universe. Tongue

True HoC but these evolutionary blokes did't resort to bizarre claims about highly improbable and devious experimental systems.Dodgy

What?!?! It was Hoyle the mathematician who turned the primeval atom into BBT with scorn, and whose "devious experimental system" was to manipulate probability to reflect that scorn... and he was a mathematician, one of my peeps. Lunacy knows no philosophical boundary. Tongue

Yes but good science does claim to work on probabilities within arbitrary boundaries.

I agree on the boundaries bit relevant to philosophy and see this as creating on going openess incompatible with hard line absolutes.

Was Hoyle a Baptist? .......Confused

Hoyle was a hard liner. I don't see atheism as being necessarily hard line, especially when it comes to individuals. I desire to see organized religion eradicated, not people. Wink

[Image: 10289811_592837817482059_8815379025397103823_n.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: