Re: [asa] A case of non-biological ID

Rich,

I really can't see the point of this long recitation. I suppose you
are trying to say that you can say something interesting about any
number given sufficient ingenuity. But some of these are really
obscure, and smack of clutching at straws. I thought I was a maths
buff, but many of these I've never heard of. I'll give you that I
know about 163 as a Heegner number (related to the fact that
e^(pi.sqrt(163)) is extremely close to an integer - a subject of a
famous April fool in Scientific American when it was claimed it WAS an
integer). But many of them I've never heard of and I think you'd need
to have done a maths degree probably to understand them! I mean what
on earth is:

618 is the number of ternary square-free words of length 15?

No idea, and what, by turn is the importance of the 15? What about
ternary square-free words of length 14? It seems to me this is a
pretty arbitrary property to pick out.

Likewise I'd be glad if you could tell me what is a strobogrammatic prime.

By contrast, Vernon's work concentrates on triangular numbers, and
hexagonal and star numbers, which are closely related to them.
Triangular numbers are taught about in maths lessons in primary
schools. You certainly don't need a university degree to understand
that 1+2+3+...+36 = 666.

As is well known I don't agree with Vernon on his linking of
Creationism to the numeric patterns in Genesis 1:1. But on the other
hand, I spent quite a long time looking into the patterns exhibited,
and came to the considered conclusion that they had to be deliberate -
in fact it was quite the most impressive example of numeric patterning
I had ever seen.

Vernon will no doubt be disappointed that I don't see it as in any way
proving that Genesis ch 1 is to be taken literally - if anything the
use of symbolism indicates a deeper meaning that the literal surface
text. It is a continuing puzzle to me as to why it's there.

Finally I have a question for Michael Roberts. Michael has repeatedly
expressed scorn for Vernon's findings, while at the same time saying
he doesn't even understand them. He also maintains it's a disgrace to
the gospel etc. Given, Michael, that you are so ashamed of Christians
indulging in such things, what on earth possessed you to post a link
to it on the bulletin board of the British Centre for Science
Education - a board populated largely by militant atheists of the
Dawkins variety, about which you have said some pretty scornful things
on this list and Christians in Science. If you are so ashamed of it,
why publicise it on a list for atheists to have a damn good laugh at?

http://community.bcseweb.org.uk/viewtopic.php?t=1268

Try reading this one by a Welshman

"The Message of the Miracle" - http://www.whatabeginning.com/anatomy.htm

Vernon
www.whatabeginning.com
www.otherbiblecode.com

---
Michael,
would you mind explaining to the list what possessed you to act so illogically?
Iain
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.