[extropy-chat] against ID

[Brett Paatsch]

Eugen wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 09:06:29AM +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote:
>
> > I think Harvey makes a good point.
>
> So do I.
>
> > Eugen, aren't you conflating creationism with numerology? On your
> > sliding scale of belief, exactly how strong is strong?
>
> I have no idea what you're talking about.

See below.

> > Or does the word "strong" relate not to the belief (which is binary one

> Why should belief be boolean?

Show me an example of when it isn't and I'll show you someone *trying* to
reason rather than merely believing.

> > either has it or doesn't) but to the SA like say hard relates to a "hard
> > takeoff"?
>
> There's zero evidence for SA.

Hal's (from memory) was right its an argument not a hypothesis.

Brett Paatsch