| Subject: Re: Hmmm - a robust arguement? |
| From: Matt Giwer |
| Date: 15/10/2004, 00:23 |
| Newsgroups: alt.astronomy,alt.sci.seti,sci.astro.seti,sci.physics |
Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
God creates all the fossils and geological features in place, giving the
appearance of an old Earth. God created the light from the stars in
transit, so you see them today.
Both those arguments circulated in published literature. It's bound to
happen when an argument involves an omniscient and omnipotent Being who
can do anything He wants at any time for any reason.
Which is why if that premise is attempted the person making it has to
demonstrate it is true before moving on to the how and why of
creation. If you actually read about that god in the early Genesis it
isn't omnicient and none too bright. Even Lot outwits it. It is far
from omni-anything save maybe pain in the ass.
If the guy insists in him rather than it, do a Capt Kirk. What use
does god have for a spaceship or a penis?
Another angle I've seen is that the speed of light is changing. One
fellow, I believe I saw this in an Institute for Creation Research
publication, fitted a variety of curves to speed of light measurements
versus time, and discovered they best fitted a logarithmic cosine,
demonstrating that he knew how to select "Fit Function" in his stat
software but knew nothing about error bars. Generate a finite set of data
with error bars that decrease in time, but whose values are essentially
random within the error bars, and you'll find a logarithmic cosine that
fits it.
Pick a year and solve e=mc^2 and estimate the temperature of the earth.
--
Beheadings work better than a pro-American TV network.
Improvised munitions work better than smart bombs.
And Americans think they can win Iraq.
The Iron Webmaster, 3263