Re: [Fwd: Re: [designorchance] Denyse's interview/ was ID controversy]

From: Jim Armstrong (jarmstro@qwest.net)
Date: Sat Nov 08 2003 - 12:05:22 EST

  • Next message: John W Burgeson: "Re: YEC vs rational inquiry"

    My apologies - I thought I had checked the originating list. Sorry - I
    try to be careful about that.
    My process is evidently neither redundant, error-correcting, nor
    fail-safe!
     JimA

    Denyse O'Leary wrote:

    > I can reply only briefly today due to other commitments, but the main
    > point of the thought exercise is to demonstrate that an assumption of
    > design has no impact on the ability to study a phenomenon, as has been
    > claimed.
    >
    > Design, in the instance of the spacecraft, is not seen only through
    > the eyes of faith. It is a matter of evidence.
    >
    >
    > I appreciate the spacecraft lingo and will work it in.
    >
    > By the way, did I post this to the ASA list? I thought I had posted it
    > to the design or chance list.
    >
    > Oh, well. This is as good a time as any to point out the existence of
    > the design or chance Yahoo discussion group, if anyone is looking for
    > a discussion group dedicated only to these issues.
    >
    > Denyse
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 08 2003 - 12:08:38 EST