At any rate, I would like to see if Flew has any corrections to make in his earlier arguments, which I have always thought were pretty trenchant. Exactly why does he think that the origin of life could only have been caused by an intelligent designer, given that contemporary science has come up with a number of quite plausible explanations (though of course we currently lack enough evidence to consider any of them well-grounded)?
Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________ In my religion there would be no exclusive doctrine; all would be love, poetry and doubt. -- Cyril Connoll (The Unquiet Grave)