Re: and who made god?

From: Albert (albertwagner_at_cox.net)
Date: 01/18/05 

Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 21:10:12 -0600

Barb Knox wrote:
> In article <HnQGd.21913$ql2.17595@okepread04>,
> Albert <albertwagner@cox.net> wrote:
>>Anthony Cerrato wrote:
> [snip]
>>>it is "pretend science" designed for misdirection to Creationism.
>>
>>No, it is not. You display your ignorance here in arbitrarily
>>grouping all who notice the scientific discoveries regarding the
>>statistical improbability of our Universe as Creationism adherents.
>
> The statistical improbability of our sort of universe

Our sort? What sort is that?

> is thoroughly irrelevant,

Irrelevant to what?

> since if the universe were not hospitable to intelligent life
> then we would not be having this discussion.

How profound! I suppose you think you have actually said something.

> The fact that this discussion
> is occurring at all drastically constrains the sort of universe in which it
> occurs.

I fail to see how current existence could have constrained the
the development of constants at the beginning in any way.

> This is the "weak anthropic principle".

No. It is your attempt to explain away the highly improbable fact
of your existence as some sort of scientific necessity. 

-- 
"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the 
range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally 
impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it."
     -- George Orwell as Syme in "1984"