Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site amdahl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!decwrl!sun!amdahl!utv
From: utv@amdahl.UUCP (Frank Dibbell)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: FUNDAMENTAL EVIDENCE FOR CREATION
Message-ID: <1334@amdahl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 26-Mar-85 18:20:32 EST
Article-I.D.: amdahl.1334
Posted: Tue Mar 26 18:20:32 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 31-Mar-85 03:06:57 EST
References: <2219@vax4.fluke.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Amdahl Corp, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 26

> From: <2219@vax4.fluke.UUCP> [Jake O'sHonesty aka Rod Foist]
> Greetings to me fellow readahs of net.oorigins.  Moy name is Jake
> O'sHonesty and Oy wooed loik to mike a contribution to this 'ere
> discussion between the Evolutionknights and Creationknights.
> 
> [a long and windy "argument by design" for the existence of a
> creator]

  This is a fairly standard argument presented in most first year
Philosophy courses for the existence of God (or creator of your choice).
Unfortunately, it doesn't prove much else, since such a Creator could
just as easily choose "evolution" to produce the myriad of life forms
that populate the world as attempt to "create" them individually.

  As a matter of fact, such a Creator probably would design "life" to
be controlled by a mechanism, which we call evolution, to make things
easier on him (it?, her?).  Kind of like designing a system.  You know,
get it right the first time, and leave it alone!  (God? A hacker?).
So we just get smart enough to figure out how he/she/it does it.  As
long as *we* don't try to "fix" it, we'll probably be OK (Don't fix
running code, right?).

  Of course, if he/she/it is a jolly joker, he could throw a wombat
or two in, just to keep us on our toes!!!  Missing link and all that.

  Then again, Descartes' Evil Demon *has* been bugging me lately...