Subject:
|
Re: Evolution vs Scientific Creationism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 12 Jul 2002 16:48:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5378 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> So regarding events prior to the Big Bang, all we have are opinions which may
> or may not be based upon religion. To say that a Creator started it all or to
> say that it all just happened are equally neutral. Would that be a fair
> assessment?
A "fairer" assessment would be that, regarding issues which we cannot
verify even in principle, science makes no statement. Similarly, some
people (myself included) might say that, since we have no basis for making a
determination, it is prudent to abstain from judgment on that question.
Imagine that you are served dinner every night by someone who prepared the
meal by his own preference and without giving you any prior indication of
what the next meal would be. If I asked you "what are you having for dinner
a week from next Tuesday?" how would you answer. The best answer you could
give would be "I don't know" or "I hope it's X." You have no basis for
making a determination. Just so with the origin of the universe.
But all that's not even relevant, really, since we've already established
that there's nothing "before" the big bang.
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Evolution vs Scientific Creationism
|
| (...) Am I *that* transparent? :-) So regarding events prior to the Big Bang, all we have are opinions which may or may not be based upon religion. To say that a Creator started it all or to say that it all just happened are equally neutral. Would (...) (22 years ago, 12-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
395 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
