> Re: Defining GOG
> Arthur V. Chadwick (firstname.lastname@example.org)
> Wed, 17 Dec 1997 16:29:18 -0800
> At 03:50 PM 12/17/97 -0600, Glenn wrote:
> > It is also fundamentally impossible to determine whether a
> >sequence made by a highly organized process like life, is different from a
> >sequence generated by random processes.THUS ONE CANNOT USE THE HIGHLY
> >ORGANIZED NATURE OF LIFE AS EVIDENCE OF DESIGN. THE COMPLEXITY OF LIFE MIGHT
> >BE DUE TO A RANDOM PROCESS.
> Goodness, Glenn, I know you are not a biologist, but this shouldn't make
> sense to a physicist either! One would certainly want to be able to
> postulate what that random process was (or can one postulate anything about
> a random process). It seems to me that it is almost impossible to detect
> truly random processes anyway, and similar arguments could equally apply to
> your thought processes, and even your existence. Maybe the postmodernists
> have a point.