Re: A case for Christianity that does use ID or YEC arguments

From: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri Jan 30 2004 - 16:44:02 EST

>
> I agree. I would like to see the ID movement focus on the anthropic
> principle more rather than on disproving evolution. When doing this they
> need to avoid the same fallacious statistical methods they apply to
> evolution, though. This would also keep people like Hugh Ross in their
> area of expertise. Some recent developments last year that would make
> for strenghtening the anthropic principle (no pun intended)include:
>
> 1. WAP satellite showing the universe is flat. One of the arguments
> against the Strong Anthropic Principle was oscillating universes. A flat
> universe does not allow for that.
>
> 2. Strong bounds on Lorenz Invariance violations. This hampers some of
> the multi-dimensional, multiple-Universe, string theories.
>
If this happened ID would not be ID but the standard fare of ASA CIS and
Polkinghorne. I find the whole fine-tuning kind of argument convincing
despite my astronomical ignorance (?)
I think ID try to subsume fine-tuning into their brief when it is something
different.

AIG are picking holes in what Ross says outside his field. See Theology wEb
on Ussher where his attacker seems devoid of any Christian Love.
I think we are all well advised to concentrate on our areas of strength and
not pontificate on everything.

Michael
Received on Fri Jan 30 17:03:26 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jan 30 2004 - 17:03:28 EST