well, there's no evidence for an accidental universe OR a designed one. The
universe is merely what it is. Design or not we really can never be sure.
As for common sense, it's common sense not to go out at night or you will
be eaten by the hungry ghosts. That is, it's common sense in *some*
cultures. To a culture that doesn't believe in the Christian god, the
"design" thing is meaningless. It is *only* meaningful in some portions of
*this* culture.
>Unlike materialists, I have no objection to
>opposing views. I think differences of opinion are healthy.
so do I. I think you don't really understand the idea behind debate. I'm
not saying you can't have your opinion--everyone has a perfect right to
their opinion. I'm saying your opinion is illogical and, at least on this
list, I have a perfect right to attempt to persuade you.
>My choice would
>be to let those scientists who believe the universe is accidental continue
>their research along those lines.
as far as I know,. they are not doing any research on these lines. Johnson
and his devotees have discovered a line of rhetoric. That's a lot different
from evidence in the scientific sense.
>I would not ridicule them or try to deny
>authenticity to their beliefs.
I deny them nothing. But I *will* attempt to persuade them otherwise.
That's the purpose of a debate forum such as this one.
>I wouldn't even try to change the mind of any
>materialist.
then why are you here? There are *lots* of interesting discussion lists around.
>earth", of having the "burden of proof" to prove what is to me is obvious
>(design). I lose track of the number of "burdens of proof" handed out every
>day by Darwinists..
actually evolutionary biologists have a huge amount of "proof" (evidence,
really, there's no such thing as "proof") they would like their critics to
come up with a little.
Susan
----------
"Life itself is the proper binge."
--Julia Child
http://www.telepath.com/susanb/