From: Dawsonzhu@aol.com
Date: Wed Nov 12 2003 - 10:07:24 EST
Let me see if maybe there might be a better way to motivate this
discussion.
Suppose in a presidential election 17 year from now in the
US, we have an incumbent president who is fairly sure _he_
(she?) has 48% of the electoral college, and the opponent 52%.
The president has ten faithful (onto death) people whom he (she?)
can trust who have enough ability and access to manipulate
the computer election processing in four states: say Alabama,
Arkansas, Nebraska and Michigan. (Let's just suppose for simplicity
that they all have a system like Florida where the winner wins
the state and the situation before election is borderline.) Say the
president wins by 51 to 49. So it is a very tight race, and the
shift is well within the error bar of uncertainty from any objective
poll which would usually have a margin of error of at least 3%.
I will forgo the matter of the possibility that someone would
rat, that the plan would be discovered etc. Let us just suppose
for sake of argument that these people really are loyal, there
are no witnesses, and they are sufficiently skilled and knowledgeable
to cover all their tracks when manipulating the computers.
So my question to Kirk would be can we prove that the president
has cheated? Surely, most of us can see the value of knowing
this, expect maybe some dyed-in-the-wool party-liners. So
Kirk, is it within the capacity of ID to identify such election fraud?
And maybe by seeing if this would work, we would have a better
idea how one might be able to detect a similar marginal effect done
by a God who otherwise has provided the world with a fully gifted
creation.
Just a thought.
By Grace alone we proceed,
Wayne
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Nov 12 2003 - 10:09:05 EST