[MD] Intelligent Design

[Ian Glendinning]

Steve, it's the conflation of creation and design that is driving me nuts.

Science has nothing to do with creation (of something from nothing).

Evolution of things (big bangs, galaxies and people) since creation
need have nothing to do with any god, since in principle it is
amenable to science. Of course being amenable in principle is a long
way from being scientifically tractable in practice, so in order not
to waste everyone's time on pointless argument some mythos-based gap
fillers are useful. (Life being too short and just complicated enough
- ask Goldilocks)

Cosmogeny (metaphyisical or theological) has nothing to do with
science ever, not even in principle.

How hard can it be ?
Ian

On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Steven Peterson
<peterson.steve at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Ian,
>
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Ian Glendinning
> <ian.glendinning at gmail.com> wrote:
>> And Steve, science is irrelevant to creation.
>
>
> That depends. It would be very hard to reconcile a literal reading of
> Genesis with our scientific knowledge. But there is no reason why
> someone could not find some way to get an idea about God's role in
> creation to cohere with science.
>
> It's like that Einstein quote that religious people like to relate,
> "There are two ways to live [our something like that], as though
> everything is a miracle or as though nothing is." What the religious
> people who cite this quote miss is that they are usually holding that
> idea that Einstein (and science) rules out: that God performs miracles
> once in a while and is more inclined to intervene when people pray.
>
> Best,
> Steve
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>