Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxq.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!ihuxq!ken
From: ken@ihuxq.UUCP (ken perlow)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Perhaps probability
Message-ID: <1160@ihuxq.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 30-Aug-84 00:06:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxq.1160
Posted: Thu Aug 30 00:06:43 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 25-Aug-84 05:45:27 EDT
References: <209@uwmacc.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 28

--
>> P.S.  I realize I haven't dealt at all with "what are the
>> scientific arguments for creation", which seems to be the burning
>> question at the moment.  I shall attempt it at a later date.
>> The question is admittedly difficult.

>> Paul DuBois

That's an understatement.  Creationists seem to accept a universe
of cosmologic scale, but in distance only, not time.  Quite a trap--
the universe sure is big, and if so, the light from distant stars
really is billions of years old.  And if there were billions of years,
then there was plenty of time for God to throw the biochemical dice
and come up with you and me.  7 come 11!

I've heard a real creationist with a real PhD (in something) say that
the speed of light is changing, and used to be much higher, perhaps
infinite.  His "research" is provably bogus, however.  And clearly,
were the speed of light truly variable, *ALL* of post-Newtonian physics
would have to be thrown out.  Gadzooks--more than that!  Do you know
how many equations "c" figures into?
-- 
                    *** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI   ***** *****
                 ****** ******    23 Aug 84 [6 Fructidor An CXCII]
ken perlow       *****   *****
(312)979-7261     ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!ihuxq!ken   *** ***