Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site cmu-cs-gandalf.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!rochester!cmu-cs-pt!cmu-cs-gandalf!hua
From: hua@cmu-cs-gandalf.ARPA (Ernest Hua)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Bill Peter
Message-ID: <229@cmu-cs-gandalf.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 4-Mar-85 03:48:23 EST
Article-I.D.: cmu-cs-g.229
Posted: Mon Mar  4 03:48:23 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 6-Mar-85 04:20:05 EST
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 24

=========================================================================
> { from: bill peter }
> 
> Similarly, with the existence of a deity.  There is no way to prove the
> existence of a deity, but a good case can be made for the fact that
> certain peculiar physical coincidences and the structure of mathematical
> and physical laws INDICATES to many intelligent people the existence of a  
> creator.

Really?!  Please post some of these "peculiar physical coincidences and
structure of mathematical and physical laws" that indicate the existence
of a creator.  If these mythical things really do exist, I think people
in places like the ICR or the Moral Majority would have quickly snagged
them and use them for propaganda.  I have yet to see one such creature.

> Note the existence of such a creator is not inconsistent with
> any known physical law or experimental observation.

Note that the existence of twenty creators is not inconsistent with
any known physical law or experimental observation.  Nor is Santa Claus
or the Easter Bunny, but I doubt you have as much faith in them as you
do in the singular deity that you refer to.
=========================================================================
Keebler