The only problem with your theory, is that I have thought it through from both positions. But in the end, if there is a god, he hates me. So F'im <grin>.
-- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" ----------------------------------- Tom C wrote: > Exactly. When it comes down to origins, none of was around at the > beginning. > > Some of us look at the evidence and believe there must have been a designer > or creator. Others look at the evidence and reject that conclusion. Some > start out with the belief that there was no designer and therefore do not > reach the conclusion there is one. Some never really think about it. Often > it may depend simply on how we were taught, who taught us, and what were > taught. > > Bringing it back to photography... ;-) > > Suppose one records an image of a spectacular bird, a beautiful mountain > sunrise, a piece of architecture, etc. The image shows evidence of > thoughtful composition, correct exposure, and is harmonious, maybe even > elegant. No one in their right mind would view the image and believe that > it just came about by chance. In fact they would credit the photographer > for having produced that image and having seen numerous repeated similar > results would conclude that the individual was an accomplished photographer. > However the photograph is simply a small 2-D representation of the real > thing. > > It's not my wish to force anyone to believe as I do, because even the > Creator I believe exists, has not done that. > > > Tom C. > > >> From: graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: Global warming was: The Nine-spotted >> Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 20:06:15 -0400 >> >> Einstein very much believed in intelligent design. He also did not believe >> in Quantum Theory, although he was the guy that came up with it, and it >> made atomic energy possible, because it went against his personal beliefs. >> Scientists are not demigods, they are humans and no more infallible than >> any other human. >> >> -- >> graywolf >> http://www.graywolfphoto.com >> http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf >> "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" >> ----------------------------------- >> >> >> Tom C wrote: >>> Like I said, I'm not holding him up as the end-all/be-all on the >> subject. >>> I used this example simply as an example of a scientist that doesn't >> (didn't >>> now) accept the dogma of the time, and was able to reach different >>> theoretical conclusions with the same set of facts. I realize you're >>> referring to the idea that the natural selection in the evolution theory >>> makes it not totally random. >>> >>> I'm pretty sure he understood the concept. Hoyle was referring more to >> the >>> theory of origins and specifically to life originating on Earth itself. >>> >>> Tom C. >>> >>>>> From: "Bob W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >>>>> To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" <[email protected]> >>>>> Subject: RE: Global warming was: The Nine-spotted >>>>> Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 23:53:02 +0100 >>>>> >>>>> Hoyle is presenting a false dichotomy in that argument. In essence he >>>>> says (in that quote) that life arose either by random chance, or by >>>>> intelligent design, and these are the only options available. They may >>>>> be the only options he could think of, but they're certainly not the >>>>> only ones available. Evolution is another option. If Hoyle thought >>>>> evolution was random chance then he clearly didn't understand >>>>> evolution. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Bob >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>>>>> Behalf Of Tom C >>>>>> Sent: 13 June 2007 23:33 >>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>> Subject: Re: Global warming was: The Nine-spotted >>>>>> >>>>>> graywolf wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hard to accept that you are not somehow special, isn't it. >>>>>> Personally I >>>>>>> believe random chance over >millions of years is the simplest >>>>> answer. >>>>>> Noted British Astonomer Fred Hoyle wrote (note I'm using this >>>>>> as an example >>>>>> of a noted and respected scientist, not that I agree with >>>>>> everything he says >>>>>> or that he's always correct... who is?) >>>>>> >>>>>> "if one proceeds directly and straightforwardly in this >>>>>> matter, without >>>>>> being deflected by a fear of incurring the wrath of >>>>>> scientific opinion, one >>>>>> arrives at the conclusion that biomaterials with their >>>>>> amazing measure or >>>>>> order must be the outcome of intelligent design." >>>>>> >>>>>> Hoyle calculated that the chance of obtaining the required >>>>>> set of enzymes >>>>>> for even the simplest living cell was one in 10 *40,000 >>>>>> power. Since the >>>>>> number of atoms in the known universe is infinitesimally tiny >>>>>> by comparison >>>>>> (10 *80 power), he argued that even a whole universe full of >>>>>> primordial soup >>>>>> wouldnt have a chance. He claimed: The notion that not only >>>>>> the biopolymer >>>>>> but the operating program of a living cell could be arrived >>>>>> at by chance in >>>>>> a primordial organic soup here on the Earth is evidently >>>>>> nonsense of a high >>>>>> order. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hoyle compared the random emergence of even the simplest cell to the >>>>>> likelihood that "a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might >>>>>> assemble a >>>>>> Boeing 747 from the materials therein." Hoyle also compared >>>>>> the chance of >>>>>> obtaining even a single functioning protein by chance >>>>>> combination of amino >>>>>> acids to a solar system full of blind men solving Rubik's Cube >>>>>> simultaneously. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Tom C. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
