Big Bang?

[Otto]

Wasn't it you who had put up the binary opposition of science and belief 
in this discussion?

Huxley says there is no such opposition, which by the way is the 
official position even of the Catholic Church regarding evolution 
because no real scientist says (as a scientist) that there's no god.

For the agnostic position the idea of  "intelligent design" is nonsense 
from the beginning. Even if there would be an intelligent design behind 
the creation there is no "scientific" way of getting knowledge about the 
designer.

Otto

jbor at bigpond.com wrote:

> On 04/10/2005, at 2:32 PM, David Casseres wrote:
>
>> I guess it's "agnosticism," but that's a category
>> invented by deists.  It means nothing to science.
>
>
> Sorry to have to correct you again, but it certainly meant something 
> to Charles Darwin:
>
> [...] In 1879 a letter came asking if he believed in God, and if 
> theism and evolution were compatible. He replied that a man "can be an 
> ardent Theist and an evolutionist", citing Charles Kingsley and Asa 
> Gray as examples, and for himself, he had "never been an Atheist in 
> the sense of denying the existence of a God". He added that "I think 
> that generally (and more and more as I grow older), but not always, 
> that an Agnostic would be a more correct description of my state of 
> mind." [...]
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin%27s_views_on_religion
>
> Interesting information, well worth a look.
>
> best
>
>


	

	
		
___________________________________________________________ 
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 1GB Speicher kostenlos - Hier anmelden: http://mail.yahoo.de