Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
talk.origins
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion Evidence of Things Unseen
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Graham Shevlin  
View profile  
 More options Mar 6 2004, 5:01 pm
Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: Graham Shevlin <graham.shev...@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 21:52:51 +0000 (UTC)
Local: Sat, Mar 6 2004 4:52 pm
Subject: Re: Evidence of Things Unseen
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 16:00:32 +0000 (UTC),

seanpitnos...@naturalselection.0catch.com (Sean Pitman) wrote:
>seanpitnos...@naturalselection.0catch.com (Sean Pitman) wrote in message <news:80d0c26f.0403050851.2235f348@posting.google.com>...
>> "Frank Reichenbacher" <vesuv...@speakeasy.net> wrote in message <news:H9-dnR7YE4srh9vdRVn-vg@speakeasy.net>...

>> > > At some point no one can
>> > > explain, in even the most remote sense, our ultimate origins.  No
>> > > theory or even the most high-level intuitive, educated guess even
>> > > begins to be adequate.

>> > Naturally you snipped two places in my post where I note that there is
>> > every reason to believe that scientists of the future *will* discover
>> > the answers to the questions you pose.

>It is easy to say this in so many words, but isn't this really nothing
>more than a statement of your religious faith?  I mean really, I can
>say, based on the current evidence that we have available to us, that
>an honest investigation of our universe will only detail an ultimate
>creative Intelligence/God in a clearer and clearer way.  Certainly the
>great weight of current evidence already speaks overwhelmingly in
>favor of an incredible intelligence behind what we see in this
>universe - especially when we look at living things.

This is nothing more than one of the enduring fallacies - an argument
from incedulity.
Just what is this "great weight of current evidence" (Hint:  Your
wonder at the natural world doesn't qualify as "evidence"). ANd while
you are considering that question., you may want to consider another
question:  Can you articulate a falsifiable theory of Intelligent
Design?

 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2013 Google