Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Ask God -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (17687)	6/17/1998 5:44:00 PM
From: Father Terrence	Respond to of 39621

C: Thanks for the clarification. Anyway, we know which way the razor would cut. FT

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (17687)	6/18/1998 11:52:00 AM
From: Sidney Reilly	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 39621

Chuzzlewit, <<Now one final thought. If presented with two plausible explanations for the same phenomenon -- explanations that differ markedly in their complexity, a pragmatist would wield Ockham's razor and eliminate the more complicated one. Look at the complicated, convoluted and self-contradictory assertions required to explain the biosphere according to religion, and compare that to the synthetic theory of evolution. Where would Ockham's razor be wielded?>> The razor would have to eliminate evolution as a viable theory. The possibility that the entire universe happened by random chance is zero. I have no less a person on my side of this than Steven W. Hawking, Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University. He wrote in his book "A Brief History of Time" that all scientific evidence shows that the universe always goes from order to disorder, never from disorder to order. This eliminates the idea that the universe is a product of chance. He concludes that the universe had to have been "created" by an intelligence with the power to do so. Without being able to find this intelligence the Christian God is as good an explanation as any. I also add that the Russians for years forced mutations in an effort to see an evolutionary jump. They never succeeded. 5% of successful mutations were benign and 95% killed the subject of the experiment! No mutation produced a better organism! Goodbye evolution! Bob