Big Bang?

[David Casseres]

Thank you.  That was exactly the point.

On 10/4/05, malignd at aol.com <malignd at aol.com> wrote:
> <<Sorry to have to correct you again, but it certainly meant something
> to Charles Darwin: >>
>
> It meant nothing to Darwin's science.  Which is the point.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jbor at bigpond.com
> To: pynchon-l at waste.org
> Sent: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 22:04:15 +1000
> Subject: Re: Big Bang?
>
>    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
>
>
>
>
>