Re: Dembski 1/2

From: Cliff Lundberg (cliff@cab.com)
Date: Sat Aug 26 2000 - 17:36:38 EDT

Next message: Chris Cogan: "Re: evidence against Darwinism-there isn't any! (was the `body language' of a threatened `priesthood'? ...)"

Previous message: Cliff Lundberg: "Re: Piecemeal genetic differences as support for macroevolution, etc."
In reply to: Bertvan@aol.com: "Dembski 1/2"
Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Bertvan@aol.com wrote:

>Bertvan:
>I don't think ID either demands or denies action through non-natural
>mechanisms. Do you consider "intelligence" either miraculous or non-natural?

Everything's natural to me. I can't imagine abandoning this for
a more complex idea. Intelligence could be miraculous, anything
could be miraculous. But nothing is supernatural. If it exists, it's
natural.

None of these terms are particularly scientific, so you can use
them any way you like without fear of logical criticism.

--Cliff Lundberg  ~  San Francisco  ~  415-648-0208  ~  cliff@cab.com

Next message: Chris Cogan: "Re: evidence against Darwinism-there isn't any! (was the `body language' of a threatened `priesthood'? ...)"
Previous message: Cliff Lundberg: "Re: Piecemeal genetic differences as support for macroevolution, etc."
In reply to: Bertvan@aol.com: "Dembski 1/2"
Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Aug 26 2000 - 18:08:39 EDT