""constancy in nature" by universal chance - a neat trick!" ????

[David Hayward]

I see that Jorge is into knee-jerk negative reactions, too.

I'm out.

[Duragizer]

I see that Jorge is into knee-jerk negative reactions, too.

You're realizing this only now?!

[David Hayward]

""constancy in nature" by universal chance - a neat trick!" ????

My reply was to rwatts, responding to his OP question and subsequent clarifications. I spent that much effort and time responding to rwatts, who is almost certainly capable of understanding the physical principles I'm getting at, not to Jorge, who has really hammered home to me that he isn't.

I am not aware of any materialist, "not true Christian" Christian, atheist, evolutionist, non Christian theist, secularist, or other wicked sinful person arguing anything like the quote in the title.

Can someone provide an example please? An example of any of us making such a silly claim? An example of any of us making an argument which implies this?

The quote looks to me like a bit of creationist silliness. Could this be possible?

I realised that one -- anyone -- could argue something like the quote in the title. And I have now provided an actual argument which implies the quote.

I hope to have clarified that ""constancy in nature" by universal chance - a neat trick!" is (potentially, at any rate) not a bit of mere creationist silliness, it's something that, according to my admittedly limited understanding of cosmology, can reasonably be interpreted in a way that does make good scientific sense, and that a cosmologist could have proposed the quote in the title -- so no, it's not a simply silly claim.

Jorge has disowned my attempt to make good sense of what he wrote. Presumably his claim -- the one he meant to make rather than the one I read his words as possibly or probably meaning -- was indeed silly.

[rwatts]

My reply was to rwatts, responding to his OP question and subsequent clarifications. I spent that much effort and time responding to rwatts, who is almost certainly capable of understanding the physical principles I'm getting at, not to Jorge, who has really hammered home to me that he isn't.



I realised that one -- anyone -- could argue something like the quote in the title. And I have now provided an actual argument which implies the quote.

I hope to have clarified that ""constancy in nature" by universal chance - a neat trick!" is (potentially, at any rate) not a bit of mere creationist silliness, it's something that, according to my admittedly limited understanding of cosmology, can reasonably be interpreted in a way that does make good scientific sense, and that a cosmologist could have proposed the quote in the title -- so no, it's not a simply silly claim.

Jorge has disowned my attempt to make good sense of what he wrote. Presumably his claim -- the one he meant to make rather than the one I read his words as possibly or probably meaning -- was indeed silly.

Hello David.

I did read your reply but decided to let it go for two reasons:-

1) I spend most of my time arguing against creationists on facebook and so, as you can imagine, have an awful lot of work to do there. (And there I see the "random chance", "blind chance", "universe from nothing (the absence of absolutely anything and everything)" claims so often, that I'm always having to explain what is wrong with simply tossing these words out, with no understanding of what the associated ideas are really about.)

2) My post was directed at Jorge. Jorge writes things I doubt he really understands himself. I'm always interested to see if Jorge can actually defend a claim he makes. It's been an ongoing battle for decades now, to see if we can really get to this magical point.

However, your points were well made and I think them valid points. That is, they were worth you writing to show that there is a real issue to be discussed.

Your effort was not waisted because other folk will perhaps read it and learn something. It's a reply i often give to creationists who get annoyed at me, asking "Why are you here?". It's always mostly for the lurkers. I have faith that one or two might read my posts and learn something about evolution in particular, and science in general.