indeed. there are *lots* of phenomena that science a good theory. very simple phenomena, like, for example, glass formation, window-kind. but that doesn't mean that it has to have a theological explanation either.
and speaking of (im)probabilities of events, guess what, the probability, that any given molecule of oxygene will travel all the way down your lungs, can be taken, quite safely, to be zero. still, somehow you don't suffocate, with a little help of statistics. so the improbable events do occur al the time, and noone gets surprised, when it does not deal with "evolution" or "cosmology". best, mishka On 2/20/06, Keith McGuinness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tom C wrote: > > "If we put to one side theological approaches to this ultimate issue, > > what rational pathways forward are on offer from the scientific > > community? " > > You seem to be creating a false dichotomoy: if science can't > explain it *now*, then the answer *has* to be God. > > This is not compelling. > > Why can't it just be that we don't know the answer now? > > There's plenty of things I can't explain. That doesn't mean that > I have to believe that God made them happen. > > Keith McG > >
