81
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 698:
Line 698: + + + +
Talk:Counterexamples to Evolution (view source)
Revision as of 03:27, January 22, 2010
, 03:27, January 22, 2010→My plans for this article: new section
::::::If I understand correctly, that means that no argument can be based on our preconceptions on how God should act. I like this, because it has the additional effect of removing the evolutionists' "argument from poor design". Who are we to judge God's acts? Solving several problems at once is the hallmark of elegant explanations. Thank you very much. --[[User:TSpencer|TSpencer]] 15:37, 13 December 2009 (EST)
::::::If I understand correctly, that means that no argument can be based on our preconceptions on how God should act. I like this, because it has the additional effect of removing the evolutionists' "argument from poor design". Who are we to judge God's acts? Solving several problems at once is the hallmark of elegant explanations. Thank you very much. --[[User:TSpencer|TSpencer]] 15:37, 13 December 2009 (EST)
== My plans for this article ==
I plan on organizing this article into groups, so there would be a group for the statistical counterexamples, and a group for the counterexamples that rely on functions that do not come from the evolutionary mechanisms. I would also like someone to rewrite the end of the intro paragraph, it doesn't make much sense how it was and only makes a little more how I wrote it. Thanks' --[[User:SamF|SamF]] 22:27, 21 January 2010 (EST)