(January 23, 2009 at 1:56 pm)CoxRox Wrote: If you expanded your statement to say for example: 'Invisible pink unicorns exist BECAUSE I detect an intelligence in the laws of mathematics/physics and indeed the intelligence behind the origins of life', then I would agree that your 'detections' are noteworthy but I would conclude that your narrowing it down to a particular entity (in this case, a pink invisible unicorn????) was somewhat peculiar, whereas I would say that I concluded that these 'laws' and intelligence pointed towards a being or intelligence of whose exact nature I did not know.
You would a: have to explain your method of dedection. b: prove that this what you have dedected in method a is indeed only possible through some deity and not formed by any natural occurrence.
Suich a statement would be nothing more but wild speculation and/or personal interpretation, and has no value as evidence.
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you