Glenn:
> I'm asking you to flesh out, for example, your statement that
> "Science asserts that creation of order occurs by chance"
>
> By flesh out I mean to express, as honestly as you can, what
> science means when, according to you, it asserts this.
> Examples would be helpful as a start. One might be that 'science
> asserts that humanity arose by chance from pond scum', since this
> is a good paraphrase of something you've written before. Saying this
> and following it up with an interpretive "Oops" or "I don't know"
> is not a fleshing of the issue but more pot-shots. It lacks an
> honest intellectual attempt to understand the full scientific
> argument.
>
> Suppose someone made a similar statement to yours in substance and
> sentiment:
> "Mathematics asserts that creation of order occurs by chance"
>
> and then made a more specific mocking assertion of this:
> "Mathematics asserts that creation of dependable casino profits occurs by
> chance" and then went on to deride mathematics for its unfailing belief in
> "Oops" and that this is mathematic's way of saying "I don't know".
>
> You should see how people like me could get easily annoyed by this.
> Glenn
Are you saying that science does not assert that creation of order
occurs by chance? If so, how does science explain the creation of
order. I'm all ears. Perhaps I'm mistaken. Can you give me a hint of
where I might find the "full scientific argument" wherein chance plays no
role? Thanks. Perish the thought that I should annoy anyone.
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:27 BST