RE: Cambridge Publishes Neo-Creationism

Randy Bronson (randy@Techsource.COM)
Mon, 2 Nov 1998 13:59:25 -0500 (EST)

On Mon, 2 Nov 1998, Pim van Meurs wrote:

> Pim:Let's assume that by chance the universe arose with physical
> constants allowing oxygen breathing carbon life forms to evolve. We are now here and marvel at how well our life form "fits" in the range of physical constants found in nature. A miracle ? Or an inescapable results ?
> Randy: A miracle? Not given the parameters of your question. Miracles, as
> defined in Scripture, have a definite purpose and therefore a "chance"
> event could not be a miracle.
> Pim:Why limit yourself to a biblical interpretation when talking about
chance then ?

I'm sorry, but I'm afraid I don't completely understand your question.

> Randy: An inescapable result? My suspicion is that the answer would also be no
> in this case. To say that an event happened by chance seems to imply that
> the result could have been other than it in fact was. But this does raise
> an interesting question. Could the physical constants of our universe have
> been other than they are? What factors determine these constants?
> That is a good question. Perhaps the quantum fluctuations dictate certain constants. That would be interesting.
> Does science have answers to these questions?( I really don't know)
> Join the club. I will be doing some more reading here.

Yes, my recent interactions on the list with you, Kevin, and Brian have
given me a lot of new research to begin.